from  f^e  &i6rarg  of 
(pxofcBBox  ^amuef  (gitffer 

in  (glemorg  of 
Sub^e  ^amuef  (Utiffer  Qgrecftinribge 

(j}re6ente^  6g 

^amuef  (QXiffer  Qgrecftinribge  feong 

to  f^e  £i6rarg  of 

(Princeton  C^eofogicaf  ^eminarg 


sec 


INQUIRY 


IJVTO    THE 


COMPARATIVE  MORAL  TENDENCY 

OE 

TRINITARIAN    AND  UNITARIAN 
DOCTRINES  ; 

IN    A 

SERIES    OF    LETTERS    TO    THE    REV.    DR.    MILLER, 
OF    PRINCETON. 

7^ 

By   JARED   sparks. 


con- 


How  great  soever  may  be  the  pretence  of  good  will,  and  charity,  and 

oern  for  the  salvation  of  men's  souls,  men  cannot  be  forced  to  be  saved, 
whether  they  will  or  no ;  and,  therefore,  when  all  is  done,  they  must  be  left 
t8  their  own  consciences. — Locke. 


BOSTON  : 

WELLS   AND  LILLY— COURT-STREET. 
1823. 


PREFACE. 


1  HE  presentwork  contains  a  series  of  Letters 
originally  published  in  tlie  Unitarian  Miscel- 
lany, 'riiey  are  here  brought  together  with 
many  important  additions  and  alterations. 
The  circumstances  under  which  they  first  ap- 
peared may  be  briefly  stated  as  follows. 

In  a  Sermon,  preached  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  "^fil- 
ler at  tite  ordination  of  the  l?ev.  Mr.  Nevins 
in  Baltimore,  were  introduced  remarks  on 
Unitarians,  which  were  thought  to  be  unrea- 
sonably severe  and  unjust.  Strictures  were 
made  on  these  remarks,  and  published  in  the 
form  of  a  letter  to  Dr.  xMiller.  To  these  he 
replied  with  a  view  to  explain  and  vindicate 
tlie  objectionable  parts  of  his  Sermon.  1  he 
third  letter  in  the  following  Inquiry,  entitled 
"  Charges  against  the  rharacter  of  Unitari- 
ans," is   the  one   first  addressed  to  him.     All 


IV  PREFACE. 


those  of  the  remainder,  whicli  were  originally 
inserted  in  the  Miscelhiny,  relate  more  parti- 
cularly to  his  JJeply,  and  the  topics  which  it 
embraces. 

In  preparin.^  these  letters  for  separate  pub- 
lication, tlie  author  deemed  it  advisable  to 
omit  some  parts,  to  write  others  anew,  to  in- 
terweave occasional  additions,  and,  by  remov- 
ing as  far  as  possible  local  and  personal  allu- 
sions, to  clothe  them  with  a  general  interest, 
and  cause  them  to  harmonize  in  illustrating 
the  point  which  he  aims  to  discuss.  1  he  first 
and  second  letters,  and  some  of  the  others, 
are  wholly  added. 

The  primary  purpose  of  the  author's  un- 
dertaking has  been,  to  trace  out  the  influence 
of  certain  religious  opinions  on  the  character 
of  the  persons  adopting  them  ;  and  his  ulti- 
mate object,  to  show  that  the  sentiments  usu- 
ally denominated  Unitarian  have  a  decid- 
ed preference  in  this  respect  to  the  high 
dogmas  of  orthodoxy.  The  discussion,  in 
some  of  its  parts,  has  taken  a  wide  range,  and 
been  conducted,  perhaps,  in  a  somewhat  de- 
sultory manner.     This  was   in   a  measure  nc- 


Preface. 


cessaryfrom  the  causes  in  wliicli  it  originated. 
It  is  believed,  however,  tliat  little  will  be 
found,  which  has  not  a  general  bearing  on  the 
subject. 

The  letters  on  Charity,  and  the  Christian 
Name,  may  at  first  be  thought  an  exception  ; 
but  when  it  is  reflected  how  strong  an  influ- 
ence the  various  sentiments  indicated  in  these 
letters  have  on  the  temper  and  feelings  of 
christians,  it  is  presumed  they  will  be  allowed 
to  hold  an  important  place  in  connexion  with 
other  parts  of  the  work. 

The  inquiry  concerning  the  opinions  of 
Newton,  I  ocke,  and  Watts,  might  possibly 
have  been  spared,  and  yet  it  has  a  natural  alli- 
ance with  the  succeeding  letter  on  the  morals 
of  celebrated  Knglish  Unitarians.  On  the 
whole,  it  is  hoped,  that  most  readers  will  flnd 
it  no  difficult  task  to  discover  sufficient  har- 
mony and  directness  in  all  the  essential  parti- 
culars brought  under  examination. 

It  has  been  no  part  of  the  author's  plan  to 
investigate  the  tritth  of  opinions,  nor  has  he 
approached  this  branch  of  inquiry  any  farther. 


Vi  PREFACE. 

than  was  requisite  for  defining  articles  of  faith 
explicitly  and  fairly.  To  accomplish  this,  it 
was  sometisnes  necessary,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
Trinity  and  Atonement,  to  compare  different 
views,  and  bring  forward  some  of  the  reasons 
by  which  they  are  severally  supported.  But 
the  chain  of  argument  is  never  meant  to  be 
directed  to  this  end  ;  its  ultimate  bearing  is  ex- 
clusively on  the  tendency  of  existing  opinions^ 
as  they  affect  piety  and  morals. 


CONTENTS. 


PJlRT  I. 

CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS. 


LETTER  I. 

Value  and  objects  of  Controversy  in  advancing  Truth  and  Practical 
Religion. 

Advantages  of  religious  controversy,  or  discussion,  p.  1.  Xhe  Saviour, 
Apostles,  and  primitive  Christians  were  controvertists,  3.  Reformation 
established  by  controversy,  5.  One  class  of  Christians  to  whom  religious  in- 
quiry can  be  of  no  service,  8.  Three  general  topics  of  religious  controver- 
sy, 9.  The  first  pertains  to  Church  government,  ib.  The  second  to  articles 
of  faith,  II.  The  third  to  the  influence  of  opinions  on  practice,  15.  To 
this  latter  branch  ©f  controversy  the  present  work  will  be  chiefly  confi- 
ned, 17. 

LETTER  IL 

Causes  of  Divisions  and  Discords  among   Christians. 

The  christian  religion  less  effectual  on  the  character  of  its  professors,  than  its 
purifying  tendency  warrants  us  to  expect,  21.  Causes  of  divisions  among 
Christians  in  eaily  times,  22.  In  later  times,  23.  Fondness  of  Christians 
to  control  the  faith  of  their  brethren,  25.  Origin  and  early  influence  of 
creeds,  ib.  Produced  discord,  26.  Two  grnnd  axioms  of  the  Refonnation, 
29.    Soon  deserted  by  the  early  reformers,  30.     False  notion  of  the  unity 


VIU  CONTENTS. 

of  faith,  31.  Scriptural  view  of  this  unity,  32.  False  mode  of  interpreting 
the  Scriptures  adopted  by  the  reformers,  33.  Unhappy  influence  of  creeds 
after  the  Reformation,  34.  Heresy,  37.  Just  remarks  of  Hoadly,  38. 
Extent  of  a  true  christian  faith,  39.  Believing  too  little,  40.  Spirit  of  in- 
tolerance, 41.  Its  baleful  effects,  42.  Influence  of  creed  making  on  mi- 
nor concerns  of  religious  societies,  44.  Disorders  and  wickedness  in  the 
christian  church  have  arisen  from  principles  opposed  to  Uiiitarianisiii,  46. 
Evils  of  orthodoxy,  48. 

LETTER  III. 

On  Charges  against  the  Character  of   Unitarians. 

Singular  mode  of  attacking  Unitarians,  50.  Charges  specified,  52,  53.  Per- 
tain to  moral  character,  54.  Dr  Pries-tley's  authority  improperly  quoted, 
55.  Ciiarges  unfounded,  56.  Rashly  applied,  57.  Unitarians  as  moral 
and  pious  as  other  sects,  59.  Uuitarianism  is  embraced  at  the  expense  of 
many  sacrifices,  60.  The  charge  of  immorality  against  Unitarianism  ex- 
tends to  some  of  the  greatest  and  best  men,  whom  the  world  has  known,  61. 
Many  names  enumerated,  and  testimonies  quoted,  62,  63,  Watts  and 
Whitby  good  men  after  they  became  Unitarians,  64.  Folly  of  rash  charges 
against  christian  brethren,  65.  Better  to  turn  them  from  their  errors  by  per- 
suasion a  nd  kindness,  ib. 


LETTER  IV. 

Charges  against  the  Opinions  of  Unitarians. 

Value  of  mutual  discussion,  66.  An  attack  on  character,  motives,  and  con- 
duct, likely  to  be  repelled  with  warmth,  68.  Sincerity  of  Unitarians,  69. 
Bioad  difference  between  charges  against  character,  and  against  opinions, 
70.  Immorality  consists  not  in  opinion,  but  acts,  71.  Mischievous  eftects 
of  misplaced  censures,  ib.  Unitarians  desire  only  to  read  the  Scriptures  and 
worship  God,  as  their  consciences  direct,  72.  In  this  exercise  no  one  has  a 
right  to  interfere  with  them,  73.  They  have  charged  no  sect  with  immo- 
rality, ib.  Unitarians  accused  of  denying  the  essential  doctrines  of  the 
christian  religion,  74.  Topics  to  be  discussed  ;^"rt/,  christian  name  and  cha- 
rity ;  secondlj/,  trinity  and  atonement;  thirdly,  moral  influence  ol  Calvinism; 
fourthly^  sentiments  and  morals  of  English  Unitarians,  75,  76. 


CONTENTS.  IS 


PART  U. 

CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY. 


LETTER  I. 

import  of  the   Christian  JVame^  and   the   Evils   of  confining  it  to 
particular  Sects. 

Names  how  far  to  be  regarded,  77.  Important  when  they  affect  the  reputa- 
tion of  those  to  whom  they  are  applied,  ib.  The  name  Christian  is  dear 
to  every  professed  believer  in  Christ,  78.  First  applied  at  Antioch,  79. 
Has  two  significations  as  pertaining  to  faith,  and  practice,  ib.  Injustice  of 
denying  this  name  to  Unitarians,  80.  Hartley's  definition  of  the  term 
Christian,  81.  President  Davies'  remarks  on  the  christian  name,  82.  No 
warrant  in  scripture  for  calling  any  of  our  brethren  no  Christians,  who 
claim  to  be  followers  of  Christ,  83.  False  estimate  of  the  essence  of 
Christianity,  84.  Bishop  Watson  quoted,  ib.  Every  sect  may  with  equal 
justice  deny  the  name  of  chiistian  to  all  others,  85.  Consequences  of  ex- 
ercising this  liberty,  86.  Hostile  to  peace  and  goodness,  87.  Unitarians 
have  been  the  ablest  defenders  of  Christianity,  88.  Lardner,  Clarke, 
Priestley,  Chandler,  Lowman,  Whiston,  Foster,  Clayton,  Hoadly,  Wake- 
field, and  a  host  of  others,  have  written  in  express  defence  of  the  christian 
religion,  90.  American  Unitarians,  who  have  written  in  defence  of  Chris- 
tianity, 94.  Excellent  treatise  of  Socinus,  96.  Absurdity  of  denying  to 
these  men  the  clwistian  name,  97.  Emlyn  quoted,  98.  Popish  infallibility 
outdone,  99.  Chillingworth,  100.  Bold  assumption  magisterially  to  decide 
on  the  faith  of  another,  ib.     An  encroachment  on  Christian  liberty,  101. 

LETTER  II. 

On  Charity  as  explained  in  the  Scriptures,  and  practised  by  the  first 
Christians. 

Charity  earnestly  inculcated  by  the  Saviour  and  Apostles,  101.  Calvinistic 
notions  of  charity,  102.     Inconsistent  with  other  principles  of  Calvinism, 


CONTENTS. 

103.  Scriptural  meaning  of  the  word  charity,  105.  Three  general  signifi- 
catioiis,  106.  In  its  common  acceptation  it  relates  to  the  thoughts,  feelings, 
and  actions  of  men  in  their  mutual  intercourse,  107.  Essential  difiference 
between  charity  and  love,  109.  This  illustrated  by  examples  from  scripture, 
110.  Evil  consequences  of  making  charity  and  love  the  same.  111.  Cha- 
rity has  its  origin  in  the  imperfections  of  men,  112.  Its  pioper  exercise  is 
exclusively  towards  errors  and  ii.nocent  defects,  f6.  It  relates  to  opinions 
more  than  to  actions,  114.  Curious  quotation  from  Dr.  Brett,  11.5.  Reli- 
gious persccirtions  have  arisen  out  of  a  want  of  charity  to  the  opinions  ol 
sincere  christinns,  117.  Our  Saviour  censured  no  man  for  what  he  thought 
or  believed,  119.  He  condemned  the  Pharisees  for  their  wicked  conduct, 
and  not  for  their  erroneous  opinions,  120.  Exclusive  notions  of  charity 
prevent  free  inquiry,  121.  Texts  explained,  by  which  some  christians 
think  themselves  justified  in  calling  others  heretics,  122.  Whitby  and  Lr 
Clerc,  125.     Unitarian  views  of  charity,  128. 


P^RT  111. 

TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT. 


LETTER  I. 

Various  Opinions  concerning   the  Trinity. 

Trinity  and  Atonement  considered  doctrines  of  the  first  importance  l)y  their 
advocHles,  129.  A  faith  in  them  is  said  to  be  essential  to  salvation,  130. 
Necessary  to  know  what  they  are,  131.  Trinity  held  in  an  infinite  variety 
of  forms,  132.  Bishop  Slillingfleet  speaks  of  five  general  ones,  133.  Ano- 
ther writter  tells  of  forty,  ib.  Scholastic  mysticism  of  Cheynel,  134. 
Siie;lock,  Barrow,  South,  and  Waterland,  135.  Various  opinions  of  seve- 
ral English  divines  on  the  trinity,  136.  Modal  and  tripersonal  trinities,  140. 
Mystical  trinity,  141.  Tripersonal  trinity  defined,  142.  Strange  language 
of  Dr.  South,  lb.  A  mystery  cannot  be  plainly  taught  in  the  Scriptures, 
144.  Modes  of  the  divine  existence,  145.  As  various  as  the  attributes  of 
God,  146. 


CONTENTS.  XI 

LETTER  II. 

Doctrine  of  a  Trinity  not  taught  in  the  Scriptures. 

Trinitarians  discourse  of  the  plainness  with  which  their  doctrine  is  taught  in 
the  Scriptures,  149.  This  is  a  modern  notion  ISO.  The  Jews  never  found  the 
trinity  in  the  Old  Testament,  151.  The  people  to  whom  our  Saviour 
preached  understood  no  such  doctrine,  152.  The  Apostles  preached  it  not, 
154.  Many  of  the  early  trinitarian  Fnthers  expres.«ly  state,  that  the  doc- 
trine was  not  found  in  the  Scriptures,  155.  They  believed  it  was  kept  out 
of  the  Bible  for  wise  jiurposes,  156.  Bishop  Horsley''s  unavailing  attempt 
to  weaken  their  testimony,  158.  Distinguished  writers  in  the  Cathi'lic 
church  have  declared  the  trinity  not  to  be  a  doctrine  of  scripture,  159.  The 
same  has  been  proved  by  learned  Arminians,  162.  By  Walts  and  other 
English  divines,  164.  Trinity  entirely  a  doctrine  of  inference,  167.  Has 
no  authority,  nor  value,  as  an  article  of  faith,  168.  Jeremy  Tayloi  on 
art.icles  of  faith,  169.     Origin  of  the  trinity,  170.     Rammohun  Roy,  171. 

LETTER  III. 

Moral  Tendency  of  a  Belief  in  the   Trinity. 

This  doctrine  injurious  to  morals  and  piety  in  proportion  as  it  gives  us  wrong 
notions  of  the  Deity,  172.  Its  iniquity  consists  in  its  consequences,  173.  De- 
stroys the  simplicity,  and  divides  the  object  of  worship,  174.  Unitarians 
woiship  God  as  one  being,  Trinitarians  as  three,  176.  Trinity  deprives 
God  of  his  glory  by  elevating  the  Son  above  the  Father,  177.  Makes  the 
example  of  God  without  force,  173.  Dangerous  tendency  of  the  doctrine 
of  two  natures,  180.  Humility  of  Christ,  181.  Dr.  Channing  ([uoted,  182* 
Trinity  deprives  the  death  of  Christ  of  all  force  as  an  argument  in  favour 
of  a  future  resurrection,  18."?.  Renders  this  death  unavailing  as  a  motive 
to  obedience  and  holiness,  184, 

LETTER  IV. 

General   Remarks  on  the   Doctrine  of  Jitonement.^  with  a  brief  out- 
line of  the  Opinions  of  Unitarian!-  on  this   Subject. 

Object  and  importance  of  the  doctane,  186.  Chaigi'  h  amst  Unitarinns  con- 
cerning this  doctrine,  187.  Belief  in  it  not  esstnti.il  to  salvation,  188. 
Such  a  belief  must  be  the  same  in  all,  but  in  the  case  of  the  atonynir^nt  it 
is  not,  189.  Unitarians  regard  the  death  of  Christ  as  in  the  highest  degree 
important,  192.  Unitarian  vievvs  of  atonement,  193.  Polish  Socinians,  ib. 
Unitarians  at  Geneva,  194,  In  England,  Emlyn,  Clarke,  Taylor,  Pixe, 
PrirstJry,  195.  In  the  United  States,  D;-.  Chamiini;,  D..  Waic,  Eva:  neli- 
cal  Lutheran  chuiches,  197.     Three  general  opinions  on  atonement,  199. 


XII  CONTENTS. 

LETTER  V. 

Trinitarian  VieiDs  of  Atonement. 

Great  differences  among  the  orthodox,  200.  Calvinistic  doctrine,  201.  Near- 
ly the  same  as  that  of  the  Universalists,  203.  Hopkinsians,  205.  Scheme 
of  Mr.  Worthington,  that  all  moral  and  physical  evil  is  removed  by  atone- 
ment, 206.  Arminian  scheme,  207.  English  Church,  208.  Magee's  views, 
tiie  same  as  those  of  many  Unitarians,  210.  Witsius  quoted,  212.  Ortho- 
dox notions  of  atonement  run  into  every  imaginable  form,  ib.  Recapitula- 
tion, 213.     The  whole  reduced  to  two  general  classes,  216. 

LETTER  VL 

On  the  popular  Doctrine  of  Atonement.^  as  affecting  the   Character 
of  God. 

This  doctrine  defined,  218.  The  same  as  the  doctrine  of  satisfaction,  21&. 
False  principle  on  which  it  is  founded  in  regard  to  divine  justice,  220.  God 
may  forgive  sin  without  satisfaction,  and  still  be  just,  ih.^  Two  kinds  of 
justice,  221.  Calvinistic  atonement  takes  from  God  the  power  to  forgive- 
222.  This  scheme  wholly  at  variance  with  the  true  nature  of  justice,  ib. 
Gives  false  impressions  concerning  what  is  called  the  wrath  of  God,  223. 
Influence  of  tliese  impressions  on  piety,  224.  Imputed  sin  and  righteousness, 
ib.  Impossible  in  themselves,  and  inconsistent  with  the  attributes  of  God, 
225.  Sufferings  of  Christ  not  in  the  nature  of  punishment,  226.  Opinions  of 
Dr.  Clarke  and  Bishop  Stillingfleet,  228.  Satisfaction  scheme  leaves  no 
room  for  the  free  grace  and  mercy  of  God,  229.  These  repeatedly  incul- 
cated in  the  Scriptures,  231.  Merits  of  Christ,  232.  By  the  Calvinistic 
scheme  no  satisfaction  is  made  to  the  second  and  third  persons  of  the  trini- 
ty, 233.  Makes  the  Son  a  more  adorable  object  than  the  Father,  234. 
Christ's  love  to  the  world,  235.  Infinite  sin,  236.  Election  and  reproba- 
tion, 237.  Tendency  of  the  doctrine  of  satisfaction  on  piety  and  worship, 
238. 

LETTER  Vn. 

On  the  popular  Doctrine  of  Atonement^  as  affecting  the  practical 
Virtues. 

Influence  of  the  doctrine  on  the  social  relations,  242.  As  it  lends  feeble  aids 
to  piety,  it  cannot  exert  much  power  on  morality,  243.  Renders  unavail- 
ing the  example  of  the  Deity,  244.    Case  of  mercy  and  forgiveness,  245. 


CONTENTS.  Xlll 

Justice  the  same  in  God,  as  in  man,  247.  Personal  responsibility, 
moral  obligation,  and  the  precepts  and  sanctions  of  the  Scriptures  not  ac- 
cordant with  atonement,  243.  The  doctrine  resolves  all  moral  duties  into 
motives  of  expediency,  249.  Leaves  no  value  in  the  practical  rules  of  the 
Gospel,  251.  Proves  the  innocency  of  evil,  252.  Edwards  quoted,  253. 
Infinite  sic,  254.     Objections  answered,  255. 

LETTER  Vlir. 

On  the  practical  Tendency  of  Unitarian  Views  of  Atonements 

All  Christians  look  for  salvation  through  Christ,  261.  They  differ  respecting 
the  manner  in  which  Christ  is  the  author  of  salvation,  ib.  This  has  not 
been  revealed,  262.  If  Unitarians  err,  their  error  cannot  affect  their  moral 
character,  263.  Three  opinions  of  Unitarians  respecting  the  influence  of 
the  death  of  Christ,  264.  First,  it  is  considered  as  a  means  by  which  par- 
don is  procured,  7b.  Secondly,  reasons  are  annexed  why  these  means  are 
effectual,  265.  Views  of  Emlyn,  266.  Benson,  267.  John  Taylor,  268. 
Thirdly,  the  death  of  Christ  is  considered  as  operating  on  men  alone,  and 
not  on  God,  270.  The  divine  love  prompts  to  salvation,  271.  God  saves 
men  freely  when  they  repent,  272.  Goodness  of  God  in  making  known  the 
terms  of  pardon,  273.  Christ  did  not  save  men  by  his  death  alone,  but  by 
all  his  works,  doctrines,  and  sufferings,  274,  Tillotson  quoted,  276.  Uni- 
tarian views  rigidly  moral  in  their  tendency,  277.  Human  merit,  278. 
Calvinism  points  out  a  way  to  salvation  without  morals,  279. 


%lt  CONTENTS. 


PART  ir. 

COMPARATIVE  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  THE  LEAD- 
ING DOCTRINES  OF  CALV  INISM  AND  THE  SENTI- 
MENTS OF  UNITARIANS. 


LETTER  I. 

Calvinisiic  and  Unitarian  Fiews  of  the  Depravity  of  Man. 

Five  points  of  Calvinism,  281.  Calvinists  Christians  because  they  believe  in 
Christ,  2S5.  Total  dep.avity  defined,  288.  Its  bad  tendency,  289.  Takes 
away  motives  of  love  to  God,  and  leaves  man  to  be  ruled  by  his  own  pas- 
sions, ib.  Depravity  preached  by  Unitavianf,  290.  ConsisteiH  with  nioial 
anion  and  accountableness,  291.  Supposes  repentance  and  holiness  with- 
in the  reach  of  the  human  powers,  292. 

LETTER  II. 

Conversion,  or   Divine  influence,  as  understood  by  Calvinists  and 
Unitarians. 

False  charge  against  Unitarians,  293.  Conversion  valuable  only  in  its  ef- 
fects, 294.  Distinctions  on  this  subject  confounded,  296.  Morality  consists 
iti  action,  not  in  opinion,  297.  Calvinistic  notion  of  Conversion  defined, 
298.  It  comes  frtim  God  without  any  condition  in  man,  300.  Witsius, 
Junius,  and  Cloppenburg,  301.  Means  of  regeneration  as  taught  by  Calvi- 
Distk,  lb.  If  the  doctrine  be  true,  it  must  cairy  with  itself  an  unfailing  tes- 
timony, 302.  Some  persons  deceive  themselves  in  this  respect,  303.  Cal- 
viniMic  conversion  a  miracle,  304.  Its  bad  moral  tendency,  305.  Men 
are  piissive  under  its  operation,  306.  Groundwork  of  fanaticism,  307. 
Regeneration  as  taught  by  Unitarians,  309.  James  Foster  and  Hoadly 
quoted  lb.  Many  things  contribute  to  pioduce  conversion,  310.  Influence 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  311.  How  Unitinans  differ  from  Calvinists  on  the  sub- 
ten  of  conveibion,  312.     Scriptural  view,  313. 


CONTENTS.  it 

LETTER  III. 

Calvinistic  Doctrine  of    Election.,    Particular   Redemption,    and 
Perseverance,  as  injiuencing   I  iety  and  JVJoruls. 

Divine  decrees,  314.  Decree  of  Election,  315.  Calvin's  explanation  of  the 
doctrine,  ib.  A  leading  tenet  of  Calvinism,  216.  This  scheme  deprives 
God  of  his  goodness,  317.  Makes  him  the  author  of  every  sinful  act,  ib. 
Represents  him  as  acting  an  insincere  part  with  his  creatures,  319.  Takes 
away  human  accountability,  ib.  Unsettles  the  foundation  of  piety,  320, 
Is  a  bar  to  the  social  virtues,  321.  Dissipates  the  fears  of  the  sinner,  .'522. 
Encourages  spiritual  presimiption,  323.  Remarkable  language  of  Calvin, 
324.  Propensity  of  Calvinists  to  pass  over  this  doctrine,  325.  Theological 
Seminaries  at  Andover  and  Princeton,  326.  Particular  Redemption,  327. 
Doctrine  of  Perseverance,  328.  Its  immoral  influence,  329.  Modified 
Doctrine  of  election,  330. 

LETTER  IV. 

Testimony  of  History  to  the  influence  of  Calvinism. 

Moral  tendency  ol  the  opinions  of  any  sect  to  be  ascertained  by  facts  and 
comparison,  332.  Character  and  conduct  of  Calvin,  334.  Persecution 
of  Servetus,  335.  Influence  of  Calvinism  in  Holland,  336.  In  England, 
337.  Among  the  early  inhabitants  of  New  England,  S38.  Persecution 
of  the  Quakers  and  Baptists,  ib.  Belknap  q  oted,  339.  How  far  the 
character  of  being  austere  and  puritanical  indicates  the  prevalence  of 
pure  religion,  340. 

LETTER  V, 

Doctrines  of  Eternal  Punishment  and  Annihilation. 
Objects  and  effects  of  piety  as  understood  by  Unitarians,  342.  Enthusiasm 
and  presumption,  342.  Preaching  against  particular  vices,  345.  Polish 
Socinians  believed  in  eternal  punishment,  348.  Faith  of  the  Swiss,  French, 
English,  and  American  Unitarians  on  this  subject,  349.  The  doctrine  of 
universal  salvation  not  more  peculiar  to  Unitarianism  than  Trinitarianism 
350.  This  doctrine  advanced  by  Origen  and  many  of  the  Fathers,  351 
Believed  and  defended  by  many  English  trinitarian  divint^s,  352.  Tillotson, 
353.  Dr.  Cliauncy,  354.  Calvinism  and  universal  salvation  closely  allied 
355.  Dr.  Huntingdon's  Calvinism  Improved,  356.  Mr.  White's  peculia: 
opinion,  357.  Tendency  of  the  doctrine  as  relates  to  the  love  of  God,  358 
To  a  sanction  of  the  divine  laws,  360.  Moral  action  can  be  influenced  on. 
ly  by  what  can  be  realized,  ib.  Annihilation  or  destruction,  of  the  wicked 
362.  Not  a  Unitarian  doctrine,  ib.  Writers  who  have  opposed  it,  363 
Moral  tendency  as  great  as  that  of  the  scheme  of  eternal  misery,  364. 


XVI  CONTENTS, 


PART  r. 


SENTIMENTS    AND   MORALS    OF  CELEBRATED  ENG^ 
LISH  UNITARIANS. 


LETTER  I. 

Theological  Sentiments  of  JVewton,  Locke,  and  Watts. 

Great  names  of  no  value  in  establishing  religious  truth,  366.  Scriptures  the 
only  authority,  ib.  Newton  and  Locke  always  accounted  Unitarians,  367. 
It  remains  for  those,  who  doubt  the  fact,  to  prove  the  contrary,  ib.  New- 
ton's history  of  two  corruptions  of  scripture,  ib.  his  remarks  on  the  bap- 
tismal form,  368.  Could  not  have  been  made  by  a  Trinitarian,  ib.  Hop- 
ton  Haynes's  testimony  to  the  Unitarianism  of  Sir  Isaac  Newton,  370.  Tes- 
timony of  Whiston,  372.  Other  testimony,  373.  E.Ttract  from  Wetstein, 
ib.  Dr.  Chalmers's  confession  in  regard  to  the  Unitarianism  of  Newton, 
374.  Locke's  unitarian  sentiments  proved  from  his  own  writings,  376.  One 
article  of  faith  essential  to  salvation,  378.  Extracts  from  Locke's  works, 
380.  Stillingfleet,  381.  Locke's  interpretations  of  the  Epistles  on  unita- 
rian principles,  332.  Opinions  of  Watts,  333.  Merivale's  letter  in  proof  of 
Watts's  unitarianism,  385.  Lardner's  testimony,  i6.  Watts's  Solemn  Ad- 
dress to  the  Deity,  386.  Proof  of  his  Unitarianism  from  his  writings,  389. 
His  views  of  the  word  person,  ib.  Of  the  Holy  Spirit,  39L  Mr.  Palmer's 
declaration,  that  Watts  considered  the  Son  inferiour  to  the  Father,  392. 
Watts's  letter  to  Dr.  Colman  in  proof  that  he  was  not  a  Trinitarian,  393. 
Watts  believed  in  the  pre-existence  of  Christ's  human  soul,  394.  Wished 
tfi  alter  his  Psalms  and  hyrnns,  395. 

LETTER   II. 

Morals  of  Celebrated  Unitarians  belonging  to  the  English  Church. 

Episcopal  Unitarians  distinguished  for  their  excellence  of  character,  400. 
Diflfcrent  modes  of  regarding  the  Articles,  401,  Firsl,  that  they  are  articles 
of  peace,  and  not  of  faith,  402.  Chillingwortli,  Sheldon,  Laud,  403.  Clay- 
ton, 40.').  .Scrnndlji,  articles  to  he  subscribed  in  the  sense  believed  by  the 
subhciilier  to  be  consistent  with  scripture,  407.  Dr.  Clarke,  ib.  Thirdli/, 
ariicli'6  to  be  considered  according  to  the  sense  of  the  framers,  409.  Paley, 
ib.  Hoadly,  411.  Bluckburne,  412.  -Articles  may  be  conscientiously  sub- 
scribed hy  persons  whose  opinions  on  many  points  differ,  414.  Submission 
to  the  Preebyter-an  form  the  same  as  subscription,  415.  The  one  involves 
no  more  immorality  than  tlie  other,  416.  Not  easy  to  trace  Calvinism,  to 
the  extent  of  its  evil  Icndincy,  417. 


AN 


INQUIRY 


COMPARATIVE  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF 

TRINITARIAN  AND  UNITARIAN 
DOCTRINES. 

PART  I. 

CHARGES  AGAINST   UNITARIANS. 


LETTER  I. 


Value  and  Objects  of  Controversy  in  advancing  Truth 
and  Practical  Religion. 

SIR, 

JL  HE  advantages  of  controversy  in  promoting  reli- 
gious truth,  and  practical  goodness,  have  been  va- 
riously estimated.  Some  persons  have  imagined,  that 
the  mischief  is  greater  than  the  benefit,  and  that 
piety  loses  more  than  truth  gains.  It  Avas  a  saying 
of  Dr.  Young,  that  "  the  dispute  about  religion,  and 
the  practice  of  it,  seldom  go  together."  In  a  limit- 
ed sense  this  may  be  true :  but  in  no  sense  does  it 
] 


2  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  i, 

afford  an  aroument  against  the  use  of  controversy, 
nor  any  proof  of  its  inutility.  The  fault  is  not  in 
the  dispute,  but  in  the  manner  of  the  dispute ;  not 
in  the  nature  or  tendency  of  controversy,  but  in  the 
temper  of  the  persons  concerned. 

No  one  needs  be  made  worse  by  having  his  opi- 
nions opposed  ;  if  they  are  false,  the  quicker  they 
are  confuted  and  abandoned  the  better.  And  how 
can  tlieir  truth  be  established,  if  never  questioned  ? 
Every  man  may  add  to  his  wickedness  by  suffering 
liis  passions  to  gain  the  mastery  over  his  reason ;  but 
no  one  can  be  in  the  way  of  danger,  who  is  induced 
to  examine  the  foundation  of  his  opinions,  give  up 
his  errors,  and  thus  cling  more  closely  to  truth,  as 
every  man  will  do,  who  makes  a  right  use  of  con- 
troversy. 

If  it  appears,  that  controvertists  themselves  are 
less  improved  than  they  ought  to  be,  by  a  mutual 
investigation  of  religious  subjects;  if,  as  in  the  time 
of  Austin,  lempestate  contentionis,  serenitas  charitatis 
ubnuljilatur,  in  the  tempest  of  contention  they  suffer 
the  serenity  of  charity  to  be  obscured ;  if  they  too 
often  substitute  loud  talk  for  plain  facts,  and  vain 
declamation  for  sound  argument;  the  public  will  ne- 
vonheloss  derive  an  advantage.  Nothliig  is  so  much 
to  be  dreaded  in  religion,  as  ignorance  and  apathy. 
Faith  will  have  no  value,  and  the  commands  of  God 
no  power,  where  there  is  not  intelligence  to  direct, 
and  energy  to  execute. 

Credulity,  superstition,  l)igo(ry,  prejudice,  may 
grow  up  in  the  desert  soil  of  a  prescribed  and  unex- 


LET.  T.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  3 

plored  faith  ;  they  may  flourish  there  in  sickly  kixu- 
riance,  till  they  overshadow  every  generous  virtue 
and  pious  sentiment.  But  if  you  would  see  the 
christian  character  in  its  excellence  and  strength,  you 
must  rouse  every  faculty,  and  bring  into  united  action 
the  best  powers,  principles,  and  affections  of  the  hu- 
man mind.  The  best  mode,  if  not  the  only  mode,  of 
creating  a  desire  of  knowledge,  a  fondness  for  studying 
the  Scriptures,  and  a  wakeful  spirit  of  inquiry,  is  to  en- 
gage in  amicable  discussions  of  such  doctrines,  as  are 
differently  understood,  by  persons  equally  zealous  for 
the  cause  of  pure  religion,  and  earnest  in  the  search 
of  truth. 

Whoever  Avill  go  back  to  the  origin  of  Christianity, 
and  follow  its  progress  down  to  the  present  time, 
Avill  do  little  else,  than  read  a  continued  history  of 
religious  controversy.  Much  the  largest  part  of  our 
Saviour's  teaching  was  employed  in  controverting 
the  opinions  of  his  adversaries.  He  argued  with  the 
Jews,  exposed  their  false  interpretations  of  the  law, 
met  their  objections,  and  confuted  their  reasonings. 

The  Apostles  were  controvertists  ;  they  preached 
to  convince  the  world  of  errors,  to  eradicate  deep 
impressions,  to  pull  down  an  old  religion  and  set  up  a 
new  one.  They  were  assailed  by  Jews  and  Gen- 
tiles, the  learned  and  the  unlearned,  the  wise  and 
the  simple,  the  poAverful  and  the  Aveak.  They 
maintained  themselves  against  all  parties,  and  every 
where  "  contended  earnestly  for  the  faith  which 
was  once  delivered  to  the  saints."  They  combated 
the  enormities  of  heathen  idolatry  ;  they  attacked 


4  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  i. 

the  prejudices  of  the  Jews,  proved  the  nulHty  of 
their  burdensome  ritual,  and  the  fulfilment  of  their 
prophecies  in  the  coming  of  the  Messiah.  Such  were 
the  labours  of  the  Apostles,  and  they  were  all  per- 
formed in  the  field  of  controversy. 

The  same  process  was  continued  for  three  centu- 
ries afterwards.  The  christian  scheme  was  attacked 
by  many  learned  men,  and  defended  by  as  many  oth- 
ers. Preachers  were  still  raising  the  banner  of  con- 
troversy, and  by  argument  and  persuasion  making 
new  converts.  At  length  councils  were  convened, 
and  the  fiery  spirits  of  a  few  ambitious  men,  kindled 
by  the  love  of  temporal  power  and  worldly  glory, 
did  much  to  retard  the  progress  and  mar  the  purity 
of  the  christian  doctrines.  But  these  doings  ought 
not  to  be  dignified  Avith  the  name  of  controversy. 
They  were  furious  contests  stirred  up  by  motives  of 
secular  concernment,  in  which  no  one  appears  to 
have  cared  for  truth  or  religion.  Articles  of  faith 
were  debated,  or  not  debated,  as  the  case  might  be, 
and  then  decided  by  a  plurality  of  voices.  Creeds 
were  made  by  acclamation,  and  that  was  declared 
to  be  a  sound  doctrine,  Avhlch  comported  with  the 
selfish  A  lews  of  the  ruling  party.  Religion  suffered 
by  these  contentions,  which  were  equally  an  outrage 
on  good  sense  and  correct  principle,  yet  no  doubt 
some  good  was  done.  A  new  impulse  Avas  given  to 
inquiry,  and  the  knoAvledge  of  Christianity  Avas  ex- 
tended. 

"^riir  lime  at  length  came  Avhen  controversy  nearly 
rcaseil.      And  \\ hat  was  religion  then?    The  liistory 


LET.  1.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  5 

of  a  benighted  world  for  ten  centuries  will  tell ;  the 
black  records  of  the  Inquisition  will  tell ;  and  so  will 
the  bloody  traces  of  a  spiritual  tyranny,  and  wicked 
persecution.  Piety  was  no  more  ;  it  had  degenerated 
into  a  set  of  outward,  slavish,  unmeaning  ceremonies. 
Truth  was  no  more  ;  it  was  lost  amidst  the  barbarous 
jargon  of  a  false  philosophy,  and  a  more  false  theo 
logy.  The  Scriptures  were  virtually  no  more  ;  they 
were  concealed  from  the  public  eye  and  forgotten. 
Religion  was  no  more  in  its  original  brightness  and 
purity;  it  was  built  on  another  foundation;  it  was 
literally  a  human  invention,  a  fiction  of  popes,  and 
councils,  and  priests.  The  world  submitted  to  the 
imposition  and  was  satisfied  with  the  counterfeit.  In- 
quiry was  no  more  ;  the  powers  of  intellect  were  be- 
numbed, reason  dethroned,  and  the  moral  sense  de- 
praved. No  energy  was  left  for  thought  or  action, 
no  light  to  guide,  no  principles  to  ennoble,  no  spirit 
to  animate.  You  look  back  on  a  melancholy  scene 
of  ignorance,  stupidity,  oppression,  servitude,  dark- 
ness, and  death.* 

The  Reformation  broke  the  spell,  and  then  con- 
troversy  revived.     The  early  Reformers,  with  the 


*  There  was  logomachy  enough,  it  is  true,  in  the  darkest  periods  of  the 
church,  but  it  was  a  battle  of  words  fought  about  shadows.  The  long  war 
between  the  Dominicans  and  Franciscans  concerning  the  merits  of  their  tutelar 
doctors,  Thomas  and  Scotus,  was  of  tliis  sort.  They  contended  warmly  and  bit- 
terly in  the  region  of  dreams  and  fiction,  but  they  rarely  came  down  to  the  hum- 
ble sphere  of  common  sense  and  rational  discussion.  Years  were  spent  and 
volumes  writen  on  the  nature  of  the  divine  co-operation  with  the  will  of  man, 
and  on  the  unity  of  form  in  man.  Nay,  the  subtle  dispute  about  universal 
ideas,  or  the  solution  of  the  famous  question,  ivhether  universal  ideas  belonged 
to  the  class  of  objects^  or  of  mere  names,  bewildered  the  most  erudite  doctors, 


6  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  i. 

vehement  Luther  and  the  mild  Melancthon  at  their 
head,  contended,  like  the  Apostles  of  old,  for  a 
better  faith.  They  waged  war  against  error,  and 
with  tile  strong  forces  of  reason  and  argument,  a 
righteous  zeal  and  firm  purpose,  they  were  victo- 
rious. It  was  a  time  of  storms,  but  the  threatening 
elements  were  calmed,  and  a  bright  day  succeeded. 
The  beams  of  a  more  glorious  sun  shone  on  the 
world,  and  warmed  into  life,  and  quickened  into  ac- 
tion, the  springs  of  intellect,  the  religious  principle, 
the  consciousness  of  moral  power  and  moral  accoun- 
tability. Tile  Scriptures  were  rescued  from  their 
long  imprisonment.  Christians  began  to  think,  in- 
quire, examine,  discuss.  These  were  great  acquisi- 
tions to  the  christian  cause,  and  they  were  gained  by 
force  ;  they  were  the  fruits  of  controversy,  the  re- 
wards of  an  independent  assertion,  and  manly  de- 
fence of  right  and  liberty. 

From  the  beo^innintj  of  the  Reformation  to  the 
present  day,  controversy  has  prevailed  among  pro- 
testants  ;  sometimes  with  too  much  violence,  and  to 
a  very  unjustifiable  extreme,  it  must  be  allowed,  but 
never  without  profit.  It  is  the  chief  corner  stone 
of  every  sect  in  Christendom.  Luther  and  Calvin 
were  controvertists  ;  and  so  were  the  Dutch  divines 
and  early  French  protestants;  so  were  Latimer  and 
Cranmer  ;  so  were  Wickliffe  and  Knox ;  Robert  Bar- 

and  kept  up  perpetual  hostilities  between  the  Nominalists  and  Realists  for 
oenturins.  It  would  be  a  perversion  of  language  to  call  these  contentions  reli- 
gious controversy,  from  which  christians  could  be  expected  to  derive  know- 
ledge or  wisdom. 


LET.  1.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  7 

clay  and  John  Wesley  ;  and  so  Is  every  man,  who 
has  a  mind  of  his  own.  While  the  liberty  of  thought 
and  speech  remains,  while  christians  are  mortal  and 
fallible,  controversy  will  never  cease,  and  it  would 
be  an  injury  to  religion  if  it  should.  If  there  be  any 
chance  of  truth  in  this  world  of  uncertainty,  it  must 
be  from  the  collision  of  opinion.  Accidental  harmo- 
ny of  thought,  and  sentiment,  and  motive,  and  de- 
sign, among  any  number  of  men,  is  not  to  be  expect- 
ed ;  it  is  not  consistent  with  the  laws  of  human  na- 
ture. It  is  only  by  comparison  and  discussion,  that 
we  can  hope  to  approximate  a  uniformity  of  opinion, 
especially  on  subjects  in  themselves  obscure  and  in- 
tricate.* 

Every  individual  has  separate  interests  and  views. 
The  social  principle  unites  some ;  similarity  of  ha- 
bits, and  affinity  of  religious  belief,  unite  others.  But 
when  the  best  is  done,  there  will  and  must  be  divi- 
sions. These  are  apt  to  provoke  the  passions ;  they 
are  unfriendly  to  charity  ;  they  sometimes  trouble 
the  fountains  and  obstruct  the  channels  of  kind  feel- 
ing and  forbearance.  Such  are  the  evils  of  sects 
and  parties  in  religion,  and  deplorable  indeed  would 
they  be,  if  the  good  did  not,  after  all,  greatly  pre- 


*  The  benefits  of  controversy  are  well  expressed  in  the  following  words  of 
Dr.  Lardner.  "  Its  effects  will  be,"  he  observes,  "  that  we  shall  all  better  un- 
derstand our  Bible.  Possibly  some  errors  may  be  mixed  with  our  faith,  which, 
by  this  means,  may  be  separated,  and  our  faith  become  more  pure.  Being 
more  confirmed  in  the  truth  of  our  religion,  we  shall  be  more  perfect  in  the  du- 
ties of  it.  Instead  of  being  unthinking  and  nominal,  we  shall  become  more 
generally  serious  and  real  christians."  Such  cannot  fail  to  be  the  good  effects 
•if  religious  controversy,  when  properly  conducted. 


8  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  i. 

ponderate.  The  differences  of  party  are  them- 
selves productive  of  good ;  more  opportunities  are 
offered  for  practising  the  christian  virtues,  trying  the 
character,  and  proving  our  sincerity,  than  we  could 
possibly  have,  if  all  were  of  one  mind  and  one  pur- 
pose. Each  party  is  compelled,  by  the  watchfulness 
of  others,  to  be  more  cautious  in  belief,  and  circum- 
spect in  practice ;  more  inquisitive  after  knowledge, 
and  zealous  in  good  works. 

There  is  one  class  of  christians  only  to  whom  con- 
troversy, or  religious  enquiry  and  discussion,  can  be 
of  no  service.  Those  persons  who  have  bound 
themselves  to  a  written  system  of  faith,  in  the  shape 
of  a  creed  or  confession,  which  they  are  resolved 
never  to  forsake,  or  which  they  engage  by  a  solemn 
covenant  always  to  support,  as  in  the  case  of  many 
clergymen,  church  members,  and  professors  in  theo- 
logical institutions ;  such  persons  cannot  possibly  ex- 
pect or  hope  to  gain  any  thing  by  examining  their 
opinions,  and  comparing  them  with  those  of  others, 
and  with  the  standard  of  the  Scriptures.  To  change 
a  single  sentiment  would  be  a  violation  of  their  cove- 
nant, and  a  crime.  What  conscientious  man  will  al- 
low the  suspicion  to  enter  his  mind,  that  any  thing 
can  bn  wrong  in  a  faith,  wliicli,  m  tlio  most  solemn 
manner,  he  has  pledged  his  veracity  and  conscience 
to  cherish  and  support?  He  may  defend  his  adopt- 
ed creed,  and  rally  round  the  system  to  which  he  is 
chained,  with  all  the  aids  in  his  power,  but  he  can- 
not go  a  step  further.  He  cannot  open  his  mind  to 
a  new  truth,  nor  suffer  himself  to  concede,  that  an 


LET.  I.]  CHARGES   AGAINST   UNITARIANS.  9 

opponenl's  argument  can  have  any  weight,  or  his 
opinions  any  claim  to  respect.  This  would  be  to 
distrust  the  grounds  of  his  own  faith,  and  to  betray 
the  guilt  of  doubting,  where  lie  has  made  a  sacred 
engagement  never  to  doubt.  What  advantage  can 
a  person,  thus  cramped  and  bound,  derive  from  an 
examination  of  religious  subjects  ?  The  pubhc  may 
be  benefited  by  knowing  his  sentiments,  and  his 
mode  of  explainirsg  and  defending  them ;  but,  as  for 
himself,  his  journey  will  be  a  circle  ;  he  Avill  end 
Avhere  he  began. 

.  The  subjects  of  rehgious  controversy  may  be  ar- 
ranged under  three  general  topics ;  first,  the  nature 
of  a  christian  church  and  the  modes  of  worship ; 
secondly^  the  truth  of  doctrines  as  articles  of  faith ; 
thirdly,  the  influence  of  belief  on  practice.  A  few 
remarks  on  these  respectively,  will  show  us  how  the 
charges  against  Unitarians  stand  in  regard  to  each, 
and  prepare  us  for  our  future  inquiries. 

The  first  of  these  topics  embraces  all  inquiries, 
which  pertain  to  the  foundation,  characteristics,  his- 
tory, government,  and  discipline  of  the  church  ;  to 
the  authority  of  the  church,  or  any  number  of  men 
calling  themselves  the  church,  in  matters  of  faith; 
to  modes  of  worship  ;  to  external  forms  and  ceremo- 
nies. In  Protestant  countries,  this  branch  of  contro- 
versy seems  nearly  to  be  exhausted.  It  was  long 
ago  settled  in  theory  by  Chillingworth,  and  Barrow, 
and  Tillotson ;  and  the  spirit  of  modern  times  is 
bringing  the  theory  into  practice.  If  there  are  yet 
some  contenders   for  tradition,  some  who    think  the 


10  CHARGES  AOAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  r. 

Protestant  cause  is  not  sufficiently  supported  by  the 
Bible,  but  needs  the  props  of  fathers  and  councils, 
their  number  is  small,  and  their  share  in  the  sympa- 
thy of  the  christian  public  at  large  proportionably 
feeble.  It  is  a  fundamental  principle  of  Protestant- 
ism, that  christians  may  think  and  decide  for  them- 
selves, and  it  is  now  generally  agreed,  that  they  may 
dilFer  on  most  of  the  particulars,  which  fall  under  this 
head  of  controversy,  Avithout  forfeiting  their  title  to 
a  good  character,  or  christian  privileges.  Which 
system  of  church  government,  or  plan  of  discipline, 
or  mode  of  worship,  is  the  best,  may  never  be  de- 
termined to  the  satisfaction  of  all  parties ;  nor  is  it 
necessary,  while  it  is  agreed,  that  every  system  and 
mode,  approved  and  followed  by  serious  christians,  is 
consistent  with  a  pure  religion  and  holiness  of  con- 
duct. 

To  this  first  part  of  controversy,  the  charges  against 
Unitarians  have  seldom  extended  in  any  distinct  or 
exclusive  form.  Their  views  are  much  the  same  as 
those  of  many  christians  of  other  denominations. 
They  maintain  the  unlimited  freedom  of  thought  and 
judgment  to  be  a  hrst  principle,  not  only  of  religion, 
but  of  human  nature.  They  believe  in  the  truth  and 
divinity  of  the  christian  religion  from  the  same  testi- 
mony as  others,  and  among  their  numbers  may  be 
reckoned  several  of  the  ablest  defenders  of  Chris- 
tianity against  the  scruples  of  doubt,  and  the  cavils  of 
inlidelity.  And  In  regard  to  the  nature  of  a  church, 
the  (luaHficatlons  and  authority  of  ministers,  forms  of 
worship,  and  other  things  of  this  description,  they  do 


j.ET.  I.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  11 

not  discover,  that  Christ  has  left  any  positive  com- 
mands, or  that  he  has  established  any  one  system  as 
preferable  to  all  others,  and  necessary  to  be  adoj)ted 
by  his  true  followers,  as  essential  to  salvation.  The 
religion  of  Jesus  Avas  intended  to  be  universal ;  and. 
in  regard  to  its  forms,  there  seems  to  be  a  wise 
adaptation  to  the  conditions  and  circumstances  of 
men  in  the  world,  to  their  customs,  manners,  organi- 
zation of  society,  and  their  political  and  civil  institu- 
tions. Unitarians  hold,  that  it  should  be  the  chief 
endeavour  to  be  sincere  and  faithful  worshippers,  af- 
ter such  a  manner  as  every  individual  shall  in  his 
conscience  believe  agreeable  to  the  word  and  spirit 
of  the  Gospel.  Any  number  of  christians  may  unite 
in  adopting  such  forms  as  they  please,  and  their  of- 
fering will  be  accepted,  while  they  seriously  strive  to 
Avorship  God  in  the  purity  of  holiness,  and  to  walk 
in  the  footsteps  of  Christ. 

The  second  topic  of  religious  controversy  includes 
what  are  usually  called  articles  of  faith.  It  looks  not 
so  much  to  demonstrable  facts,  as  to  reasonings  from 
facts,  and  is  less  concerned  in  telling  men  what  to  do, 
than  Avhat  to  think.  The  theatre  of  controversy,  to 
which  this  topic  opens,  is  boundless.  It  has  been 
traversed  in  every  direction,  but  has  never  been 
compassed,  and  never  will  be,  while  the  powers  of 
mind  are  so  various,  and  the  force  of  evidence  is  so 
unequally  felt ;  while  the  imagination  is  so  fertile,  and 
the  lights  and  shadows  of  truth  and  error  are  so  inti- 
mately blended  in  the  objects  of  human  thought  and 
inquiry. 


12  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  i. 

It  can  never  be  expected,  that  all  men  will  have 
the  same  conceptions  of  the  abstruse  points  of  reli- 
gion, anj  more  than  of  other  things  less  difficult,  of 
philosophy,  science,  arts,  principles  of  taste,  the  cau- 
ses of  natural  phenomena,  and  the  designs  of  provi- 
dence. Controversy  has  not  been  useless  on  the 
doctrinal  parts  of  religion,  although  it  has  brought  to 
hght  much  less  sound  knowledge,  than  the  friends  of 
a  practical  faith  could  desire.  Fancy  has  set  no 
bounds  to  her  excursions,  but  she  has  often  delighted 
more  in  the  desert  wastes  of  ideal  speculation,  than 
in  the  fertile  and  productive  regions  of  reality  and 
plain  sense.  The  technics  of  a  school  divinity,  and 
the  subtleties  of  an  artificial  logic,  contrivances  well 
devised  for  making  darkness  more  dark,  and  dulness 
more  dull,  have  too  often  spread  mysteries  around 
truth,  and  conducted  the  inquirer  into  a  maze  from 
which  no  human  sagacity  could  extricate  him,  and 
where  no  refuge  was  left  but  to  submit  to  his  fate. 

It  is  happy,  that  these  pompous  trifles  are  nearly 
abandoned.  Their  influence  remains,  but  it  is  fast 
disappearing.  Reason  is  assuming  its  just  controul, 
common  sense  is  throwing  olF  the  fetters  of  delu- 
sion, and  human  nature  itself  is  restless  under  the 
thraldom,  wliich  ignorance,  and  fanaticism,  and  folly 
have  imposed  on  it.  Tiieology  and  the  sciences,  a 
knowledge  of  God  and  of  his  works,  have  gone  hand 
in  hand ;  one  has  smoothed  the  way  for  the  other, 
and  the  progress  of  each  is  a  test  of  the  gaining  power 
of  intellect  over  sense,  reality  over  fiction,  freedom 
over  servitude,  and  piety  over  a  visionary  enthusiasm. 


i-ET.  I.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  13 

The  seventeen  ponderous  volumes  of  the  seraphic 
doctor,  Aquinas,  with  his  learned  reveries  and  mysti- 
cal refinements,  and  the  twelve  folios  of  his  great  an- 
tagonist, Duns  Scotus,  now  rest  undisturbed  by  the 
side  of  the  scarcely  less  weighty  lumber  of  LuUy  and 
Paracelsus,  filled  with  grave  dissertations  on  the 
philosopher's  stone,  elixirs  of  life,  horcscopes,  and 
planetary  correspondences.  They  are  now  equally 
forgotten,  or  remembered  only  as  proofs  of  the  de- 
graded condition  of  the  human  mind  in  the  times  of 
which  they  were  considered  the  ornament  and  the 
boast. 

Credulity  Avas  the  spring  of  a  barbarous  philosophy 
in  science,  and  of  an  irrational  faith  in  religion.  Con- 
troversy revived  a  wakeful  distrust ;  inquiry  and 
truth  followed.  Articles  were  examined;  imposture 
was  detected ;  the  Scriptures  were  honoured  and 
brought  into  use  ;  the  understanding  was  consulted  ; 
a  process  was  commenced,  which  has  continued  for 
three  hundred  years,  and  is  still  going  on  with  in- 
creased eifect.  Much  rubbish  has  been  removed  ; 
much  more  remains;  long  creeds  have  been  shorten- 
ed ;  they  are  daily  becoming  shorter,  and  it  is  no  vain 
hope,  perhaps,  that  they  may  at  some  future  period, 
be  made  to  approximate  the  measure  and  stature  of 
the  Scriptures.  Free  and  friendly  discussion  will 
hasten  the  time.  Even  then  christians  will  have  dif- 
ferent opinions.  So  let  it  be  ;  there  is  no  help  for 
it,  nor  evil  in  it.  Let  them  still  discuss,  and  be  friends 
and  brethren  ;  let  them  rejoice,  that  something  is 
left  to  employ  their  powers,  try  their  faith,  exercise 


14  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  i. 

their  charity,  and  give  an  ample  scope  to  their  best 
virtues. 

As  Unitarians  differ  from  those,  Avho  call  them- 
selves orthodox,  chiefly  in  points  of  doctrine,  they 
have  been  compelled  to  engage  much  in  this  depart- 
ment of  controversy.  Charges  of  heresy,  unbelief, 
denying  the  Saviour,  and  perverting  the  Scriptures, 
have  been  poured  out  upon  them  with  a  confidence 
and  self-sufficiency,  that  bear  few  marks  of  the  hu- 
mility inculcated  in  the  Gospel.  They  have  defend- 
ed themselves,  as  God  has  given  them  strength, 
against  the  prejudices  of  sectarism,  the  asperity  of 
intolerance,  the  pretensions  of  the  self-righteous,  the 
subtleties  of  the  ingenious,  the  arguments  of  the 
candid,  and  the  sober  objections  of  the  sincere  and 
well  informed.  They  have  claimed  the  privilege  of 
obeying  conscience,  and  of  relying  on  the  Scriptures 
for  the  truth  of  their  opinions.  Yet  the  same  char- 
ges continue  to  be  reiterated.  When  the  arguments 
of  Unitarians  cannot  be  confuted,  the  next  step  is  to 
question  their  motives;  when  such  opinions  as  they 
ojienly  profess  are  found  impregnable,  it  is  charita- 
bly insinuated,  that  others  are  concealed,  which  they 
dare  not  publish  ;  when  reason  proves  a  feeble  or 
treacherous  ally,  it  is  thought  honourable  to  employ 
the  pioneers  of  censure  and  reproach.  Argument 
goes  out  supported  by  recrimination,  and  where  one 
fails  to  produce  conviction,  the  other  may  succeed  to 
rivet  a  prejudice.  But  these  are  abuses  of  contro- 
versy, which  must  gradually  disappear.  The  spirit 
of  tiio  times  will  not  lojjg  tolerate  them  ;  liberty  and 


RET.  I.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  15 

reason  will  be  heard,  justice  and  truth  will  be  re- 
spected. 

The  third  general  topic  of  religious  controversy 
which  relates  to  the  influence  of  opinion  on  practice, 
or  the  efficacy  of  belief  on  the  conduct  of  christians, 
has  been  much  less  tried  than  either  of  the  two  pre- 
ceding. It  has  never  been  pursued  with  much 
method,  nor  to  any  great  extent.  Luther  and  the 
first  Reformers  brought  it  into  the  afiair  of  indul- 
gencies,  works  of  supererogation,  and  perhaps  some 
two  or  three  other  articles  of  the  Catholic  faith. 
But  it  has  not  been  so  usual  to  combat  error  with  its 
tendency  and  consequences,  as  with  the  weapons  af- 
forded by  first  principles  and  established  facts.  The 
doctrines  of  election,  and  reprobation,  of  total  depra- 
vity and  imputed  righteousness,  have  been  some- 
times examined  in  regard  to  their  moral  tendency  by 
the  Arminians,  and  others  opposed  to  the  Calvinistic 
dogmas ;  yet  the  endless  controversies  about  these 
doctrines  have  been  concerned  almost  wholly  with 
their  foundation  and  reality. 

It  was  not  till  less  than  thirty  years  ago,  that  a 
formal  attack  was  made  on  any  sect  of  christians,  as 
entertaining  an  entire  system  of  belief  unfriendly  to 
morals,  and  destructive  of  piety.  Mr.  Andrew  Ful- 
ler was  the  first,  it  is  believed,  who  thought  it  his 
duty  to  descend  to  this  ungracious  task,  in  his  indis- 
criminate assault  on  Unitarians.  His  book  was  not 
without  ability,  nor  more  remarkable  for  the 
author's  talent  at  popular  declamation,  than  for  his 
limited  acquaintance  with  the  grounds  of  the  Unita- 
rian belief,  and  his  unguarded  assertions ;  for  his  as- 


16  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS,  [part  l. 

sumption  of  facts,  Avhich  never  existed,  and  his  de- 
duction of  consequences,  which  never  could  follow. 

Tlie  argumentative  part  of  tins  work,  which,  in- 
deed, was  a  very  small  part  of  the  whole,  was  con- 
futed in  two  short  treatises,  one  by  Di:  Toulrain,  and 
the  other  by  Mr.  Kentish.  To  the  declamation, 
rhapsody,  and  rashness,  no  reply  was  made,  as  none 
was  necessary.  The  subject  has  been  more  recently 
touched  in  an  eloquent  sermon  by  Mr.  Fox,  but  with- 
out any  direct  bearing  on  the  controversy  at  large. 

In  this  country  you  are  the  first  person,  it  is  pre- 
sumed, who  has  imitated  the  example  of  Mr.  Fuller. 
You  have  taken  up  the  subject  on  the  same  grounds, 
and  pursued  it  in  nearly  the  same  track.  Starting 
with  similar  positions,  you  make  similar  inferences, 
in  both  of  which  I  think  you  are  under  mistake.  I 
believe  you  err  in  supposing  Unitarianism  to  be  the 
fountain  of  all  evil,  and  Calvinism  of  all  good.  My 
reasons  will  appear  in  the  sequel. 

By  maintaining,  that  Unitarians  are  not  christians, 
that  their  religious  faith  is  false,  and  that  it  sanctions 
and  encourages  a  wicked  life,  you  have  done  as 
much  as  could  be  done  to  compel  them  to  speak  in 
their  defence.  He  would  be  strangely  indifferent  to 
the  value  of  his  own  character,  as  well  as  of  his  re- 
ligion, who  should  be  reluctant  to  defend  himself 
against  such  charges.  The  controversy,  it  is  true, 
carries  with  it  somewhat  of  an  invidious  aspect.  It- 
is  no  |)l(asant  duty  to  search  out  the  weaknesses  of 
our  brethren,  nor  to  show  how  inq)crfectly  their  j)ro- 
fessions  agree  with  their  j)raclice  ;    and  much  less  to 


T,ET.  I.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  17 

look  around  and  select  a  few  persons,  whom,  with 
ourselves,  we  pronounce  to  be  more  holy  than  oth- 
ers. 

To  prove,  that  any  system  of  faith  has  a  bad  ten- 
dency is  much  the  same  as  proving,  that  he  who  re- 
ceives it  is  bad  in  consequence  of  his  faith.  And  who 
would  delight  in  such  a  work  ?  We  may  hence 
learn,  that,  in  this  discussion,  principles  should  be 
kept  as  distinct  as  possible  from  men,  and  that 
whatever  may  be  proved  to  be  the  tendency  of  any 
doctrine,  its  actual  effects  should  not  be  estimated 
except  in  connexion  Avith  other  doctrines,  and  the 
peculiar  circumstances  of  every  person,  Avho  is  judg- 
ed by  his  opinions. 

My  chief  purpose  will  be  to  make  it  manifest,  that 
the  faith  and  morals  of  Unitarians  are  not  wor- 
thy of  the  odium,  which  your  charges  were  calculat- 
ed, and,  as  far  as  appears,  designed  to  cast  on  them. 
The  best  m^anner  of  prosecuting  this  purpose  un- 
doubtedly is,  to  compare  these  with  the  faith  and 
morals  of  Calvinists,  or  of  other  christians,  at  the 
same  time  that  we  apply  the  strength  of  argument 
to  abstract  principles.  The  subject  naturally  ap- 
peals to  such  a  comparison,  as  the  question  is  not, 
which  party  is  perfect,  but  which  is  the  most  defec- 
tive in  consequence  of  its  faith,  and  whether  any  one 
is  to  be  pointed  at,  and  denounced,  and  condemned, 
by  all  the  rest. 

An  investigation  of  this  sort,  conducted  Avith  a 
proper  spirit,  cannot  fail  to  terminate  in  benejficial 
results.     How  far  (he   followino;   treatise  will   bear 


1*8  CHARGES  AGAINST  UMITARIANS.  [part  r. 

tills  character,  must  be  left  for  those  to  decide,  who 
are  willing  to  read  with  candour,  and  judg^e  by  the 
christian  rules  of  forbearance  and  charity.  It  is 
hoped,  that  nothing  will  be  found  Inconsistent  with 
a  due  respect  for  the  serious  opinions  of  every  chris- 
tian, nor  with  the  liberty  and  independence  with 
wl.ich  every  one  ought  to  assert  and  defend  his 
own  sentiinenis.  But  on  this  point  it  would  not  be 
safe  to  promise  much.  All  expei-ience  has  proved, 
that  theological  zeal  is  not  contented  with  the  sober 
standard  of  wisdom  and  moderation.  It  sometimes 
burns  with  a  scorching  flame,  rather  than  with  a 
mild  light  and  gentle  warmth.  To  say,  that  this 
/eal  shall  always  be  subdued  to  a  just  tempera- 
ment, would  be  presumptuous  in  one,  who  makes 
no  pretensions  to  infallibility,  nor  claims  any  exemp 
tion  from  the  infirmities  of  human  nature.  In  exe- 
cuting the  task  before  us,  no  other  qualifications  are 
held  out,  and  no  other  exertions  pledged,  than  such 
as  flow  from  a  love  of  truth,  sincere  motives,  good 
intentions,  and  a  warm  Interest  in  the  subject. 

I  may  at  last  fall  to  convince  you,  that  your  char- 
ges are  Incorrect  and  misapplied  ;  I  may  not  succeed 
in  making  It  clear  to  your  understanding,  that  they, 
who  huild  their  highest  hopes  on  the  Gospel,  and 
the  divine  character  of  Christ,  are  christians,  and  are 
to  !jc  treated  as  christians;  but,  should  I  be  thus 
uu'^uccessful,  I  shall  not  think  my  labour  unprofita- 
bly  bestowed  in  defendirig  what  I  deem  to  be  the 
tintli  nf  the  Gospel,  in  rescuing  my  religious  belief 
from  ungeneroiis  lm[)utatlons,  in  doing  justice  to  the 


LET.  I.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  19 

character  of  many  good  men,  and  in  pleading  the 
cause  of  rational  piety,  religious  liberty,  toleration, 
and  charity. 

The  course  which  the  nature  of  the  subject  re- 
quires me  to  pursue,  comes  wholly  within  the  third 
division  of  controversy.  The  truth  of  opinions  will 
be  no  farther  brought  into  notice,  than  is  necessary 
to  state  them  fairly.  Nevertheless,  the  ultimate  ob- 
ject of  all  honest  inquiry  is  truth.  This  is  an  eter- 
nal and  unchangeable  reality,  essentially  good  in 
itself,  and  salutary  in  its  influence.  When  we  ar- 
rive at  truth,  we  are  at  the  end  of  our  journey  ;  and 
if  all  the  doctrines  of  faith,  and  positions  in  morals, 
could  be  demonstrated  to  be  absolutely  true,  it 
Avould  be  an  idle  waste  of  time  to  look  after  their 
consequences.  But  since  we  know,  that  such  a  de- 
monstration is  not  always  possible,  and  that  a  chain 
of  proofs,  which  carries  conviction  to  one  mind,  fre- 
quently communicates  no  impressions  to  another,  it 
is  allowable  to  try  different  methods  of  investigation, 
and  to  turn  our  inquiries  into  any  channels,  which 
will  conduct  us  to  the  main  object. 

As  a  general  rule,  it  is  much  easier  to  judge  be- 
tween good  and  evil,  than  truth  and  error.  We  can 
with  more  confidence  say,  that  a  man's  conduct  is 
bad,  than  that  his  faith  is  false  ;  and  hence  we  can- 
not always  affirm,  that  his  creed  is  true  or  false  in 
proportion  to  his  good  or  evil  deeds.  Many  faith- 
ful christians,  no  doubt,  have  occasion  to  lament  nu- 
merous defects  of  duty,  which  they  would  be  unwil- 
ling to  have  charged  to  their  unbelief.     It  cannot  be 


20  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  x. 

denied,  however,  that  there  is  a  close  connexion  be- 
.  tween  faith  and  practice.  A  man  will  act  according 
to  his  convictions,  and  an  irreligious  practice  can 
never  be  the  consequence  of  a  right  faith.  So  far  as 
such  a  practice  depends  on  faith  at  all,  it  will  be  a 
faith  in  error,  for  truth  is  the  parent  of  good.  The 
conclusion  is  obvious,  that  we  can  refer  no  man's 
conduct,  either  good  or  bad,  to  his  faith,  unless  we 
can  prove  such  a  connexion  between  them,  that  one 
will  necessarily  proceed,  or  does  actually  proceed, 
from  the  other  ;  and,  moreover,  that  no  one's  creed 
is  to  be  set  down  as  false,  merely  because  he  does 
not  act  as  he  professes  to  believe.  By  analogy,  rea- 
son, argument,  deduction,  and  other  methods,  Ave 
may  show  the  evil  tendency  of  an  opinion,  and  its 
natural  consequences  ;  but  when  we  come  to  con- 
duct and  character,  we  must  be  guided  by  definite 
principles,  speak  from  facts,  and  judge  with  charity. 


iET.  II.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  21 

LETTER  II. 

Causes  of  Divisions  and  Discords  among  Christians. 

SIR, 

It  is  a  common  and  just  remark,  that  the  rehgion 
of  the  Gospel  acts  with  less  power  on  the  hearts  and 
lives  of  its  professors,  than  its  divine  nature  and  pu- 
rifying tendency  warrant  us  to  expect.  This  truth 
is  not  more  the  exultation  of  the  unbeliever,  than  the 
humiliating  confession  of  the  sincere  disciple  of 
Jesus.  What  all  acknowledge,  the  faithful  cannot 
but  lament,  that  the  authority  of  religion  is  compara- 
tively so  little  respected,  and  its  influence  so  feebly 
felt,  even  among  christians,  who  believe  themselves 
sound  in  doctrine,  and  exemplary  in  practice.  Some, 
it  mav  be,  are  better  than  their  principles;  many, 
it  is  certain,  are  worse  ;  and  none  are  so  good  as  not 
to  discover  many  sad  deficiencies,  when  they  com- 
pare their  own  character  with  the  example  and  re- 
quisitions of  Christ. 

Many  causes,  no  doubt,  which  are  common  to  all 
christians,  conspire  to  bring  about  this  imperfect  dis- 
charge of  religious  duty.  They  may  often  grow  out 
of  circumstances  peculiar  to  individuals,  out  of  a 
course  of  unexpected  events,  local  connexions,  tem- 
porary hopes  and  fears,  natural  disposition,  tempera- 
ment, habit.     There  is,  however,  one   source,  deep 


22  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  i. 

and  broad,  in  which  all  the  others  are  swallowed  up. 
It  is  the  spirit  of  division  and  discord,  which  has 
reigned  with  so  absolute  a  controu!  in  the  hearts  of 
christians  during  all  periods  of  the  church.  To  this 
single  cause  you  may  refer  much  the  largest  portion 
of  evils,  which  have  afflicted  the  christian  world. 

Tliat  these  ill  consequences  should  have  followed 
the  lirst  attempts  to  promulgate  the  Gospel,  is   not 
surj^rizlng.     The  doctrines  preached  by  the  Apostles 
were  at  that   time  in    the  highest  degree  heterodqx 
in  the  eyes  of  all  mankind  ;    they  opposed  establish- 
ed opinions   and  habits;    they  aimed   a   destroying 
blow  at   religions  and  superstitions,  which  had  not 
only  become  venerable   by  their  antiquity,  but  chevr 
ished  till  they  were  believed  to  be  true  and  sacre^. 
Prejudice  was   arrayed   against  them  ;  the  interests 
of  men  cried  out  that  they  were  an  innovation,  and 
must  be  resisted  ;  the  wisdom  of  the  world  proclaim- 
ed them  a  novelty,  better  calculated  to  delude  than 
instruct  the  people ;     human  policy  proscribed  them 
as  dangerous  intruders  on  ancient  forms,  which  ought 
to  be  censured  by  the  friends  of  order,  and  suppres- 
sed by   the  arm  of  power.     In  this  state  of  things,  it 
could  not   be  supposed,  that  the    religion  of  Jesus 
would  make  its   way  without  many  struggles  against 
opposition,    or  that  men  would  quietly  suffer  princi- 
ples to  gairi  ground,   in    which  they  saw  the  ruin   of 
their  temporal  interests  and  inilucnce.     It  is  easy  to 
connect  with  these  causes,  the  violence  aijd  malignity, 
the  persecutions  and  cruelties,  which  the  fu'st  chris- 
tians experienced  from  every  quarter. 


LET,  n.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  23 

When  we  come  down  a  few  centuries  lower,  and 
beh jld  the  rehgion  of  the  Gospel  seated  on  the 
thrones  of  emperors  and  kings,  and  uttering  the 
voice  of  authority  and  power,  we  have  a  right  to 
be  prepared  for  better  things.  From  a  rehgion,  the 
first  principles  of  which  inculcate  peace,  and  good 
will,  and  charity,  we  are  fully  authorized  to  look 
for  harmony,  humanity,  and  kindness.  Was  this  ac- 
tually the  result  ?  Far  from  it.  Scenes  of  strife 
and  contention  were  acted  over  among  christians 
themselves,  darker  and  more  dreadful,  if  possible, 
than  any  to  which  the  ignorance  and  ferociousness  of 
heathenism  had  given  countenance.  "  It  is  a  ques- 
tion," says  Hoadly,  "  whether  more  unkindness  and 
inhumanity,  more  malice  and  hatred,  more  vio- 
lence and  barbarity,  have  been  shown  by  heathens 
and  infidels  towards  christians  for  the  sake  of  their 
religion,  than  have  been  shown  by  christians  towards 
one  another  on  the  score  of  some  religious  diiferen- 
ces."*  The  annals  of  religious  persecution  are  the 
records  of  human  misery.  How  many  have  been 
deprived  of  their  rights,  their  freedom,  and  posses- 
sions ;  how  many  have  sunk  under  the  bloody  rod  of 
tyranny,  been  torn  from  tiieir  friends,  and  banished 
from  their  native  country;  how  many  have  been 
buried  in  dungeons,  condemned  as  criminals,  tortur- 
ed, and  burnt,  merely  because  they  could  not  force 
their  conscience  and  understanding  to  receive  the 
notions,  which  chanced  to  run  through  the  minds  of 
their  deluded  and  inhuman  persecutors. 


Hoadly's  Works,  vol.  I.  p.  35. 


24  CHARGES   AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  r; 

Let  us  take  one  step  more,  and  descend  to  our 
own  times.  We  have  no  persecutions  now  with 
blood,  and  sword,  and  fire  ;  no  racks,  nor  dungeons, 
nor  gibbets;  but  we  have  divisions  enough  ;  we  have 
heart  burnings,  and  evil  speaking,  tumults,  dissen- 
sions, animosities,  violence  ;  we  have  a  plentiful  vo- 
cabulary of  hard  names,  choicely  selected  and  libe- 
rally applied  to  kindle  the  passions,  provoke  ill  na- 
ture, raise  high  the  voice  of  contention,  and  make 
broad  the  line  of  separation  between  christian 
brethren  ;  we  have  abundance  of  the  spirit  of  party, 
the  pride  of  self-consequence,  appellations  of  re- 
proach, denunciations,  anathemas,  charges  of  heresy, 
and  consigning  to  perdition. 

In  short,  christians  have  the  same  heats  of  zeal, 
the  same  uncharitableness,  the  same  propensity  to 
undervalue  the  merits  and  misconstrue  the  intentions 
of  others,  the  same  over-weening  confidence  in  their 
own  opinions,  and  horror  at  the  opinions  of  those  dif- 
fering from  them,  the  same  exclusive  temper,  and 
the  same  disposition  to  confine  the  limits  of  salvation 
to  the  circle  of  their  own  walks,  as  they  had  twelve 
centuries  ago.  The  gradual  increase  of  intelligence, 
and  of  respect  for  human  rights  and  liberty,  has  mo- 
dified the  action  of  these  causes,  and  made  their  ef- 
fects more  mild  ;  yet  the  seeds  of  discord  still  take 
root,  and  produce  a  vigorous  growth.  Divisions,  on 
grounds  merely  of  opinion  and  speculation,  are  at  this 
(lav  formidable  obstacles  to  the  peace  and  charity, 
harmony  and  mutual  forbearance,  which  the  Gospel 
in  its  true  spirit  both  rorpiires.  and  is  eminently  quali- 
lied  to  ectaltlish. 


LET.  ir.]  CHARGES   AGAINST   UNITARIANS.  2D 

Now  if  we  choose  to  search  for  the  origin  of  these 
perversions,  it  will  be  clearly  discovered  in  the  fond- 
ness^ which  a  great  majority  of  christians  have  mani- 
fested, for  taking  on  themselves  the  guardianship  of 
other  people's  consciences  and  faith.  Thej  have 
shown  an  extreme  solicitude  to  make  all  persons 
think  and  believe  like  themselves,  and,  to  bring  this 
to  pass,  have  deemed  it  a  pious  and  charitable  act  to 
set  at  nought  the  rights  of  conscience,  to  silence  rea- 
son, and  demand  implicit  submission.  Hence  Chris- 
tendom has  been  deluged  with  creeds,  and  con- 
fessions, and  symbols,  and  articles,  till  the  plain 
believer,  who  supposed  the  words  of  Jesus  Christ 
and  the  A})ostles  to  be  the  only  true  symbols  of 
a  christian's  faith,  has  been  confounded  amidst 
such  a  labyrinth  of  contradictions.  But  the  amaze- 
ment and  confusion  of  believers  have  been  among 
the  least  mischiefs  of  these  strange  devices.  Tyrants 
and  the  abettors  of  faction,  as  well  ecclesiastical  as 
political,  have  found  them  potent  engines  in  cramp- 
ing the  human  mind,  and  pressing  it  into  the  vilest 
compliances.  Once  rivet  the  fetters  of  superstition, 
and  hangout  the  signal  of  sanctity,  and  there  Avill  be 
no  want  of  numbers  to  rally  round  the  standard,  and 
engage  with  enthusiasm  in  any  cause,  which  it  may 
be  the  good  pleasure  of  their  leaders  to  pursue. 

That  such  were  the  motives,  which  first  suggested 
this  unholy  artifice  of  creed-making,  is  too  notorious 
to  require  a  comment.  Was  not  the  Nicene  creed 
itself  framed  amidst  the  fiercest  heats  of  feuds  and 
faction  ?  And  when  you  read  the  history  of  the 
4 


26  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  i. 

church  during  the  two  or  three  succeeding  centuries, 
tliose  fruitful  eras  of  human  symbols,  does  the 
thought  ever  strike  you,  that  the  prominent  actors 
had  the  honour  of  religion  at  heart,  or  once  dreamt 
of  setting  up  the  laws  of  Gospel  charity,  peace,  humi- 
lity, and  piety  ?  No,  you  behold  a  scene  of  scanda- 
lous warfare,  and  creeds  marshalled  against  creeds, 
not  to  enforce  the  truth  or  practice  of  religion,  but 
to  express  personal  antipathy,  to  cast  reproach  on  a 
minority,  or  to  anathematize  an  enemy.  The  good 
Fathers  at  the  council  of  Ephesus  even  "  pronounced 
an  anathema  on  all  those,  that  should  add  any  thing 
to  the  creed  of  Constantinople,"  hereby  commencing 
a  quarrel,  not  only  with  such  as  then  difFored  from 
them,  but  with  all  that  ever  should  differ.^  Creeds 
were  the  watch-words  of  party ;  they  were  fire- 
brands thrown  among  the  multitude  to  keep  alive 
the  flame  of  passion  and  madness.  They  aiforded 
inexhaustible  materials  for  strife  and  discord,  and 
those  materials  were  not  used  with  a  sparing  or  un- 
skilful hand  by  the  persons,  who  had  collected  them 
and  knew  their  value. 

To  this  single  practice,  so  early  commenced,  of 
assuming  power  over  the  faith  and  opinions  of  men, 
and  of  attempting  to  controul  them  in  things  in  which 
it  was  impossible  that  they  should  be  controlled, 
you  may  refer,  with  a  precision  almost  demonstra- 
tive, the  unhappy  divisions  among  christians  before 
the  Reformation.  It  was  not  in  the  power  of  prin- 
ces, popes,  bishops,  nor  councils,  to  chain  the 
thoughts.      They  might   threaten,  oppress,  banish, 


i,ET.  II.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  27 

murder,  as  they  did ;  but,  they  could  do  no  more. 
Volumes  of  creeds,  and  anathemas  Avithout  number, 
would  not  induce  a  man  to  believe  what  every  prin- 
ciple in  his  nature  revolted  at.  Using  force  would 
rouse  his  indignation,  and  make  him  burn  with  ha- 
tred and  revenge  ;  or,  perhaps,  it  might  drive  him 
to  be  a  hypocrite  and  deceiver.  In  either  case  he 
would  be  more  wicked  for  his  adopted  creed. 
Take  away  restraint,  command  every  one  to  think 
for  himself,  assure  him  of  his  freedom  and  personal 
responsibility,  tell  him  to  be  guided  by  the  Gospel, 
and  his  faith  will  then  be  sincere,  he  will  believe 
and  act  like  a  christian. 

These  remarks  prepare  us  for  entering  on  the 
main  subject  of  the  present  letter,  Avliich  is  to  inquire 
into  the  occasion  of  religious  diiferences  among  Pro- 
testants, and  to  ascertain  the  comparative  agency, 
which  orthodoxy  and  Unitarian  sentiments  have  had 
in  causing  these  differences,  and  in  promoting  the  re- 
ligious antipathy  and  dissensions,  which  have  prevail- 
ed even  from  the  time  of  Luther,  and  which  are 
greatly  to  be  lamented  at  the  present  day.  The 
merits  of  the  general  inquiry  on  which  we  have  en- 
tered hang  with  no  inconsiderable  weight  on  this 
pointy  Certain  causes  have  had  very  extensive  ef- 
fects. To  which  system  are  these  to  be  ascribed? 
Some  of  the  leading  principles,  on  which  christian 
communities  have  been  organized,  and  churches  in- 
stituted, and  discipline  established,  have  tended  to 
produce  divisions,  to  create  aversions,  to  clothe  some 
men  with  a  factitious  authority,  and  to  oppress  and 


28  CHARGES^  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  r 

irrltate  others.  The  party,  which  has  embraced 
these  principles,  and  put  them  in  practice,  is  ac- 
countable for  the  consequences.  By  principles  here, 
I  do  not  mean  any  peculiar  doctrines  of  religious 
faith,  but  the  grounds  assumed,  and  the  steps  taken, 
to  promulgate  these  doctrines.  In  this  respect, 
have  the  sentiments  of  Unitarians,  or  of  the  ortho- 
dox, been  productive  of  the  greatest  degree  of  evil  ? 

A  few  brief  hints  on  the  course  pursued  by  the 
first  Reformers  and  their  immediate  followers,  or 
the  motives  by  which  they  were  influenced,  and  the 
objects  at  which  they  aimed,  will  place  this  sub- 
ject in  its  proper  light,  and  prove,  if  I  mistake  not, 
that  the  divisions  and  party  violence,  occasioned  by 
dilierences  of  opinion,  owe  their  origin  to  ihe  very 
same  causes  since,  as  before  the  Reformation.  They 
will  he  found  to  have  oriu^inated  in  building  up  systems 
of  faith  distinct  from,  the  Bible,  and  claiming  authori- 
ty to  establish  them  as  standards  of  sound  doctrine,  and 
tests  (f  orthodoxy.  This  was  a  foible  with  which  the 
world  seems  to  have  been  so  much  in  love,  that 
christians  could  not  prevail  on  themselves  to  part 
with  it,  even  while  rebelling  against  its  power,  and 
deprecating  its  baleful  tendency.  In  yielding  to  this 
weakness,  they  violated  the  fundamental  principles 
of  the  Reformation,  and  created  the  elements  of  fu- 
ture disorder;  and  just  in  proportion  as  they  ran  to 
this  extreme,  they  were  opposed  to  the  principles  of 
Unitarlanism.     This  will  appear  as  we  proceed. 

The  ll(!  format  ion  was  started  on  the  foundation 
of  truth  antl    reason.     Two  grand  axioms  were  laid 


LET.  II.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  29 

down,  as  a  basis  on  which  the  entire  superstructure 
was  to  be  erected,  namely,  the  right  of  private  judg- 
ment In  all  the  concerns  of  religion,  and  the  sirfficiency 
of  the  Scriptures  in  qualifying  believers  for  the  at- 
tainment of  salvation.  It  was  justly  asserted,  that 
the  rights  of  human  nature  give  every  man  liberty, 
nay,  require  it  of  him  as  a  duty,  to  use  his  best  pow- 
ers freely  and  Independently  In  determining  the  man- 
ner in  which  he  is  to  serve  his  Maker.  And,  again, 
it  was  maintained  with  equal  cogency,  that  the  Scrip- 
tures, which  contain  a  revelation  fromGcd  expressly 
designed  for  the  moral  Improvement  and  final  salva- 
tion of  men,  must  in  themselves  be  adequate  to  every 
purpose  of  instruction,  concerning  the  principles  of 
faith  and  the  rules  of  action. 

These  axioms  form  the  ground- work  of  a  true 
scriptural  theology.  Let  them  be  rigidly  observed, 
and  it  will  be  impossible  to  fasten  dangerous  and 
entailed  error  on  the  mind,  or  to  foment  the  elements 
of  discord,  or  to  multiply  the  tokens  of  perpetual 
altercation.  Quarrels,  and  persecutions,  and  resent- 
ments, merely  on  account  of  differences  in  religious 
opinions,  will  cease,  when  you  take  away  the  char- 
ters for  the  defence  of  which  the  armour  of  sacred 
warfare  is  put  on.  Send  all  men  to  the  Bible  as  the 
only  charter  of  their  faith,  and  you  will  place  them 
on  common  ground,  and  bring  them  into  a  bond  of 
union.  They  will  not  see  every  part  of  the  Scrip- 
tures alike,  but  this  variety  of  mental  vision  will  be 
no  obstruction  to  harmony,  since  It  is  allowed  by  the 
lirst  laws  of  union,  that  every  one  shall  judge  of  the 


30  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [fart  i. 

Scriptures  according  to  the  light  and  knowledge, 
which  he  possesses.  It  is  the  spirit  of  these  axioms 
to  permit  Christians  to  differ  in  opinion,  and  yet  bind 
them  together  as  brethren. 

Had  the  first  Reformers  been  faithful  to  the  prin- 
ciples, which  they  embraced  at  the  outset  with  so 
much  wisdom  and  intrepidity,  the  history  of  the 
Protestant  church  would  wear  an  aspect  very  differ- 
ent from  the  one,  which  it  now  exhibits.  But  the 
trial  was  too  much  for  their  experience,  if  not  for 
their  firmness.  They  stumbled  almost  at  the  first 
step,  and  never  recovered  themselves  afterwards. 
It  was  a  notion  of  the  Catholics,  that  a  perfect  una- 
nimity of  faith  was  absolutely  necessary  to  constitute 
a  true  church ;  and  an  objection,  which  they  urged 
with  great  warmth  against  the  Protestants,  was,  that 
the  liberty  assumed  by  them  would  open  a  door  to 
an  infinite  variety  of  opinions,  and  terminate  in  a 
dismemberment  of  the  church,  and  the  overthrow  of 
Christianity  itself. 

Alarmed  at  these  threatened  consequences,  and 
anxious  to  fortify  themselves  against  the  attacks  of 
their  opponents  on  this  point,  they  gradually  deserted 
their  position,  and  became  themselves  deluded  with 
the  dream  of  a  uniformity  of  faith.  They  were  next 
driven  to  the  severe  task  of  devising  some  mode  of 
establishing  this  uniformity,  without  destroying  the 
fundamental  axiom,  which  proclaimed  it  to  be  the 
duty  of  every  Christian  to  think  and  judge  for  him- 
self.    This  project  was  not  more  absurd,    than  im- 


LET.  n.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UiMTARIANS,  31 

possible,  and  the  attempt  to  put  it  in  execution  could 
only  end  in  oppression,  folly,  and  mischief. 

The  evil  originated  in  false  views  of  the  thing  call- 
ed unity  of  faith.  It  was  imagined  to  consist  in  a 
perfect  uniformity  of  opinion^  and  the  first  effort  was 
to  make  all  persons  yield  assent  to  the  same  inter- 
pretation of  the  Scriptures.  Luther,  and  his  follow- 
ers, maintained,  that  the  Scriptures  were  the  only 
rule  of  faith.  This  was  consistent  with  the  first 
principles  of  the  Reformation.  But  they  further 
contended,  that  there  could  be  no  true  church  with- 
out a  perfect  coincidence  of  opinion.  This  proposi- 
tion was  directly  opposed  to  the  other.  To  make 
the  two  hang  together,  it  was  discovered  that  the 
Scriptures  had  but  one  sense,  and  it  was  of  course 
afiirmed,  that  no  one  could  be  a  true  believer,  who 
did  not  interpret  them  according  to  this  sense.  It 
soon  came  to  pass,  indeed,  that  they,  who  studied  the 
Scriptures  and  believed  them  as  their  understanding 
and  conscience  required,  were  set  down  as  heretics 
and  ungodly  men,  not  to  be  countenanced  nor  tolerat- 
ed by  the  faithful. 

Now,  that  there  is  such  a  thing  as  a  unity  of  faith 
in  the  true  christian  church,  no  one,  whether  protes- 
tant  or  Catholic,  can  possibly  doubt.  But  what  is  it  ? 
Not  a  unity  of  belief  in  human  interpretations  of 
Scripture,  in  articles  constructed  by  wise  men,  or 
imposed  by  designing  ones,  or  sanctioned  by  councils 
and  convocations.  What  better  would  the  world  be. 
what  would  morality  and  religion  gain,  if  all  men 
should  unite  in  believing  the  contradictions  of  the 


32  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [I'ART  i. 

Athanaslan  creed?  How  would  it  increase  their 
piety  or  goodness  to  profess  a  unanimous  belief,  that 
the  '^  Father  is  God,  the  Son  is  God,  and  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  God,  and  yet  there  are  not  three  Gods,  but 
one  God?"  Or  how  would  it  add  to  their  benevo- 
lence, humanity,  and  kind  feelings  to  harmonize  in 
the  assent  and  declaration,  that  •'  whosoever  does 
not  keep  this  faith,  whole  and  undefiled,  without 
doubt  he  shall  perish  everlastingly  ?"  Or  how 
would  it  help  them  along  in  the  work  of  holy  living 
to  unite  in  the  faith,  that  they  are  "  utterly  indispos- 
ed, disabled,  and  made  opposite  to  all  good,  and 
wholly  inclined  to  all  evil,"  as  the  Confession  of 
Faith  assures  us?  Would  men  be  more  wise,  virtu- 
ous, or  holy  by  a  unity  in  such  dogmas  as  these  ?  No. 
The  same  question  may  be  asked,  and  the  same  an- 
swer returned,  respecting  a  thousand  other  articles 
of  human  invention,  scarcely  less  contradictory,  or 
immoral  in  their  tendency. 

But  there  is  a  unity,  which  the  Gospel  commands, 
•'  a  unity  of  the  spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace."  Let 
this  be  established  in  the  hearts  of  christians,  and 
they  will  have  no  difficulty  in  coming  together  in  the 
true  scriptural  unity  of  faith.  Believe  and  practice 
what  every  one  perceives  to  be  plain,  and  believe  it 
in  the  words,  and  practice  it  in  the  spirit,  of  the  Gos- 
pel. There  will  then  be  a  natural  unity  of  faith  in 
all  the  doctrines,  which  conspnc  to  form  the  chris- 
tian character  ;  for  these  are  truths  of  practical  im- 
port, and  appear  in  essentially  the  same  light  to  eve- 
ry honest  mind.     Every    attempt    beyond  this   will 


LET.  n.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  33 

only  drive  men  asunder,  and  destroy  the  unity,  which 
the  Scriptures,  left  to  themselves,  are  calculated  to 
produce ;  a  unity  of  pious  and  virtuous  action,  of 
sympathy,  benevolence,  and  affection,  of  love,  chari- 
ty, hope,  and  righteous  intention.  Nothing  can  be 
more  mischievous,  than  the  fancy,  which  many  have 
taken  up,  that  all  the  world  must  be  uniform  in  be- 
lieving what  they  choose  to  prescribe.  We  may 
safely  affirm,  that  it  is  impossible  for  those,  who 
read  the  Bible,  not  to  agree  in  every  thing  necessa- 
ry to  salvation.  This  is  the  only  unity  of  faith, 
which  can  ever  be  attained  ;  no  other  is  needed  ;  to 
require  any  other,  as  a  qualification  for  christian 
fellowship,  gives  evidence  either  of  a  deplorable  ig- 
norance of  the  objects  of  religion,  or  a  wilful  assump- 
tion of  authority,  which  receives  no  countenance 
from  the  tenour  of  the  Gospel,  nor  the  reason  of 
man. 

A  little  experience  soon  proved  to  the  first  Re- 
formers, that  they  could  not  give  currency  to  what 
they  would  fain  have  acknowledged,  as  the  one  sense 
of  Scripture.  How,  then,  could  these  delusive  notions 
of  a  unity  of  faith  be  realized?  One  resort  only  re- 
mained, and  that  was,  to  go  back  to  the  old  contri- 
vance of  creeds  and  restrictions.  They  hastened  to 
this  resort,  and  thus  thought  to  accomplish,  by  hu- 
man systems,  what  they  had  despaired  of  doing  by 
the  native  light  and  unaided  force  of  the  word  of 
God. 

The  consequence  was  such  as  might  be  expected. 
This  attempt    at  harmony  and  conciliation  only  in- 


34'  CHARGES  AGAIAST  UJNITARIANS.  [part  i, 

creased  the  flame,  and  aggravated  the  evils,  whlcli  it 
was  intended  to  allay.  The  creeds  expressed  the 
sentiments  of  their  makers,  and  nothing  more.  If  it 
chanced,  that  thej  agreed  with  the  Bible,  it  wae 
well  ;  but  if  it  happened,  that  there  was  no  such 
lucky  agreement,  they  were,  nevertheless,  clothed 
with  the  same  authority,  and  imposed  with  the  same 
confidence  and  dictation.  And  even  supposing  they 
did  agree,  the  persons  on  whom  creeds  were  intend- 
ed to  operate  would  not  be  more  likely  to  believe 
the  truths  of  Scripture,  when  woven  into  a  set  of  un- 
scriptural  phrases,  than  they  would  when  expressed 
in  the  words  of  the  Scriptures  themselves.  In  their 
most  favourable  aspect,  therefore,  creeds  are  of  no 
manner  of  use.  If  they  contain  precisely  what  the 
Bible  contains,  they  are  not  wanted ;  if  they  contain 
more,  they  are  an  imposition,  and  a  clog  to  faith  and 
holiness.  If  the  word  of  divine  truth,  as  revealed 
from  heaven,  will  not  bring  about  a  unanimity,  surely 
there  is  no  little  folly,  no  little  presumption,  in  sup- 
posing it  to  be  more  easily  done  by  any  forms  of  hu- 
man contrivance. 

No  sooner  had  a  certain  number  of  persons  sepa- 
rated themselves  from  the  main  body,  under  pre- 
tence of  having  the  true  faith  in  a  formulary  of  their 
own  making,  than  pride  and  self-consequence  begaa 
to  spring  up  on  the  one  j)art,  and  jealousy  and  disaf- 
fection on  the  other.  These  were  followed  by  divi- 
sions, enmity,  hatred,  evil  thoughts,  and  unrighteous 
deeds.  They,  who  still  adhered  to  the  first  princi- 
ples of  the  Reformation,  to  the  freedom  of  judgment 


LET.  II.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  3i» 

and  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures,  considered  their 
liberty  invaded,  and  were  as  little  prepared  to  sub- 
mit to  this  new  domination,  as  to  the  old  against 
which  they  had  rebelled.  A  spirit  of  resistance  was 
awakened,  and  this  is  always  accompanied  with  pas- 
sion and  excitement.  It  leads  to  violence,  resent- 
ments, harsh  fcehngs,  and  to  a  thousand  ill  effects, 
which  destroy  peace,  and  the  good  influences  of  the 
Gospel. 

When  it  was  found,  that  some  christians  valued 
themselves  for  their  creed,  and  held  it  up  as  a  badge 
of  distinction,  and  a  token  of  superiour  sanctity,  it  is 
not  wonderful,  that  others,  who  could  not  bend  their 
consciences  into  that  shape,  should,  nevertheless,  re- 
solve not  to  be  out-done  by  their  brethren,  especial- 
ly in  so  easy  a  mode  of  gaining  consequence,  and 
should  construct  a  creed  to  their  own  liking.  So  it 
happened.  Creeds  rose  upon  creeds,  and  the  inven- 
tors of  every  new  one  would  be  particularly  careful 
to  draw  out  the  points  in  which  they  differed  from 
others  as  prominent  and  full  as  possible,  that  they 
might  prove  how  solid  were  their  grounds  of  dissent. 
Hence  every  additional  creed  was  certain  to  contain 
something  not  before  discovered.  It  would  have 
manifested  a  sorrowful  lack  of  wisdom,  indeed,  to  go 
through  the  trouble  and  formality  of  making  a  new 
creed,  which  should  contain  only  what  was  already 
in  others  of  good  authority.  Here,  then,  was  a  most 
prolific  source  of  religious  dogmas ;  they  were  mul- 
tiplied from  this  source ;  and  every  new  article  add- 
ed a  new  point  of  contention. 


36  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  i. 

Thus,  the  predictions  of  the  Catholics  were  in  a 
good  degree  verified  by  the  very  measures,  which 
were  emploved  to  prove  their  futility.  Protestants 
were  divided  in  every  thing,  and  it  was  vain  to  ask 
where  was  the  true  faith.  Each  one  found  it  in  his 
own  cimrch,  but  to  thousands  of  others  this  church 
was  heretical.  To  do  away  the  reproach,  a  project 
was  at  length  formed  of  bringing  together  the  most 
popular  creeds  under  the  imposing  title  of  a  Harmo- 
ny of  Confessions.  This  was  done,  but,  alas,  no  har- 
mony appeared.  Not  a  church  in  Christendom 
would  have  adopted  any  two  of  these  confessions  en- 
tire, much  less  the  whole  in  a  body.  In  some  things 
they  agreed,  in  many  they  dilfered  ;  and  together 
they  proved  to  what  an  extreme  of  contradictions 
even  Protestants  could  run,  when  they  abandoned 
the  principles  of  the  Reformation,  preferred  their 
own  wisdom  to  the  wisdom  of  God,  and  their  own 
inventions  to  the  simplicity  of  the  Gospel  precepts. 

To  the  passion  for  established  Confessions  may  be 
attributed  the  propensity,  so  common  among  chris- 
tians, of  calling  harsh  names,  applying  reproachful 
epithets,  and  charging  their  brethren  with  heresy 
and  unbelief.  It  is  observable,  that  they  who  are 
the  most  rigidly  wedded  to  forms  of  faith,  have 
usually  been  the  tirst  to  commence  the  outcry  of 
heresy,  and  the  most  relentless  in  pursuing  the  un- 
fortunate delinquent.  The  reason  is  obvious.  While 
they  are  guided  by  human  forms,  why  should  they 
not  condemn  all  persons  as  infidels,  who  persist  in 
acknowledging  assent  to  the  Bible  only  ?     Was  any 


J.ET.  »i.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  37 

man  ever  denounced  as  a  heretic  for  not  believing  in 
the  Bible  ?  Not  one.  Martyrs  have  been  tried  by 
creeds,  and  condemned  for  denying  creeds.  They 
have  suffered  for  the  constancy  of  their  faith  in  the 
Scriptures.  Does  not  every  church  employ  the 
term  heretic  to  denote  one,  who  rejects  its  assumed 
articles  ?  Does  not  that,  which  makes  a  heretic  in 
ens  church,  make  a  saint  in  another  ?  Judge  every 
man  by  the  Bible  alone,  and  you  will  have  no  further 
occasion  to  torture  his  conscience  and  blacken  his 
character  with  the  hideous  terrors  of  excommuni- 
cations, anathemas,  and  cruel  aspersions  on  the  charge 
of  heresy. 

I  speak  not  of  the  original  meaning  of  the  word, 
but  of  its  popular  use,  or  rather  abuse.  Every  per- 
son, charged  with  heresy,  professes  a  firm  and  sin- 
cere belief  in  the  Gospel.  Otherwise  he  would  not 
be  a  heretic,  but  an  infidel.  His  accusers  call  him  a 
heretic,  not  because  he  does  not  believe  the  Bible, 
but  because  he  cannot  believe  it  as  they  do.  He  is  a 
heretic  in  the  eyes  of  Calvinists,  because,  perhaps,  he 
does  not  believe  one  of  the  five  points;  of  Arminians, 
because  he  believes  them  all  ;  of  Baptists,- because 
he  sprinkles  infants ;  of  Congregationalists,  because 
he  does  not  sprinkle  them  ;  of  Presbyterians,  because 
he  believes  in  bishops ;  of  Churchmen,  because  he 
does  not  believe  in  them.  And  so  we  are  all  here- 
tics to  one  another,  and  yet  the  faith  and  hopes  of 
all  centre  in  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ. 

Is  it  said,  that  in  accusations  of  heresy,  the  accu- 
ser always  understands  the  term  to  indicate  a  deficien- 


38  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  i. 

cy  of  faith  in  the  Scriptures?  Let  this  be  granted, 
and  the  case  is  not  altered.  The  accused  tells  you? 
that  he  does  believe  the  Scriptures,  and  what  better 
authority  can  be  had,  than  his  own  declaration? 
May  he  not  justly  consider  the  enforcement  of  a 
charge,  under  such  circumstances,  as  the  wickedest 
persecution?  Why  is  he  to  be  branded  with  an 
odious  epithet  for  valuing  his  faith  as  dearly  as  an- 
other, who  may  rashly  accuse  him  of  being  a  here- 
tic, for  maintaining  his  independence  and  a  clear  con- 
science ?  Abolish  creeds,  obey  the  Scriptures,  re- 
spect conscience,  and  no  room  will  be  left  for  church- 
es, or  individuals,  to  denounce  their  brethren  as 
heretics,  or  to  kindle  discord  by  recrimination  and 
offence.* 

But  oppression  and  tyranny,  contentions  and  broils, 
quarrels  between  churches,  enmities  between  neigh- 
bours, coldness  between  friends,  faction  in  states,  tu- 
mults in  society,  tranquillity  disturbed,  peace  de- 
stroyed, and  good  faith  violated,  have  not  constituted 

*  The  following  remarks  of  Bishop  Hoadly  are  just  and  forcible.  "  This 
is  laid  down  as  rerlain.  that  tliougli  true  religion  be  little  regarded,  but  rather 
trampled  on  by  the  generality  of  the  world,  yet  the  pretences  taken  from 
thence  are  moving,  and  never  fail  to  alarm  the  multitude,  and  to  forward  a 
design.  Any  doctrine  manifestly  framed  to  serve  a  purpose,  can  at  any  time 
be  made  the  distinguishing  mark  of  a  true  christian,  or  the  true  church  ;  and 
all,  that  will  not  yield  to  the  truth  of  it,  shall  presently  be  branded  with  some 
religious  nickname  or  other.  Heretic,  schismatic,  lalitudinarian,  fanalie, 
and  the  like,  are  all  names  taken  from  some  differences,  in  the  holding  and 
professing  the  same  religion.  And  they  have  been  used  so  freely,  and  after 
sucli  a  manner,  as  that  they  have  often  effectually  contributed  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  christian  charity,  to  the  overthrow  of  peace  and  concord,  to  the  ruin  of 
many  excellent  designs,  and  to  tlie  promoting  of  many  bad  ones."  Hoadly'* 
Works,  Fol.  Vol.  I.  p.  36. 


LET.  n.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  39 

all  the  bad  effects  of  prescribed  forms  of  belief. 
They  have  been  the  refuge  of  depravity,  the  cloak 
of  artifice,  the  screen  of  hypocrisy,  a  veil  of  dark- 
ness, which  has  concealed  many  a  purpose  of  black- 
est die,  many  a  heart  of  foulest  treachery.  'I'hey 
have  too  often  produced,  in  the  language  of  Jerom, 
Concordia  malorum  major  quam  bonorum,  a  greater 
harmony  of  Avicked,  than  of  good  men.  Who  does 
not  respect  the  garb  of  piety  ?  Who  will  suffer  the 
eye  of  suspicion  to  rest  on  the  robes  of  formal 
sanctity  ?  When  a  man  talks  much  of  his  creed, 
and  punctually  observes  the  written  forms  of  his 
church,  does  not  all  the  world  cry  out,  his  faith  is 
sound,  and  all  must  be  right  ?  Here  is  the  decep- 
tion. Piety  is  so  rare  a  grace,  that  Ave  are  apt  to 
connect  its  essence  Avith  forms  ;  and  Confessions  of 
faith  are  the  most  convenient  and  imposing  forms 
imaginable.  They  cost  nothing ;  they  may  be  had 
for  the  wearing;  and  they  afford  an  impenetrable 
covert  for  every  species  of  fraud  and  iniquity. 

Again,  the  habit  of  creed  making  has  given  rise  to 
a  dangerous  fallacy  respecting  the  extent  of  a  true 
christian  faith.  Many  seem  to  think  a  system  of  be- 
lief valuable  and  safe  only  in  proportion  to  its 
length.  The  gradual  enlargement  of  the  standard 
Confessions  has  encouraged  this  notion.  The  most 
ancient  creed,  fabulously  denominated  the  Apostles', 
contains  a  dozen  lines;  the  Nicene,  twice  as  much  ; 
the  Athanasian,  twice  as  much  more  ;  the  Augsburg 
Confession  contains  tAventy-eight  chapters  ;  the  Eng- 
lish, thirty-nine  articles  ;     the   Scotch,    thirty-three 


40  CHARGES   AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  ffART  i. 

chapters.  Thus  have  points  of  difference  been  mul- 
tiplied. Every  age  has  added  something,  till  finally 
the  more  copious  the  system  of  faith,  the  more  se- 
cure the  believer  thinks  himself. 

It  is  no  uncommon  thing  to  find  persons,  who  trem- 
ble at  the  thought  of  believing  too  little,  but  never 
dream  of  the  peril  of  believing  too  much.  And  yet, 
which  is  the  most  dangerous?  What  is  it  to  have  a 
correct  faith?  Is  it  not  to  believe  the  exact  truth? 
Is  the  hazard  less  on  one  side,  than  on  the  other? 

It  seems  a  matter  of  confidence  and  satisfaction  to 
some,  that,  since  they  believe  all  that  others  believe, 
and  much  more,  their  chance  of  salvation  is  propor- 
tionably  enhanced.  What  is  this  much  more  ?  If  it 
be  truth,  it  is  important  ;  but  if  it  be  error,  it  is  a 
pernicious  addition.  The  doctrines  of  the  christian 
religion  are  facts ;  they  are  to  be  studied  as  facts, 
and  understood  as  such.  They  rest  on  evidence  and 
conviction,  and  to  carry  them  beyond  these,  manifests 
weakness  and  credulity,  rather  than  a  teachable  dis- 
position, or  a  sound  mind.  When  you  search  for 
historical  facts,  are  you  gratified,  that  the  historian 
tells  you  a  great  deal  more  than  ever  happened  ? 
When  you  read  a  book  of  science,  do  you  think  it  an 
advantage,  that  the  writer  has  interwoven  conjec- 
tures of  liis  own  with  his  demonstrations,  and  the  re- 
sults of  his  experiments?  Why,  then,  should  it  be 
thought  safe  to  adopt  a  principle  m  religion,  which 
is  the  last,  that  would  be  admitted  in  the  inquiries  of 
common  life,  and  which  affords  no  means  of  distin- 
cuishiiii:  truth  from  falsehood? 


LET.  n.]  CHARGES   AGAINST   UNITARIANS.  41 

In  short,  as  credulity  is  a  more  common  failing 
than  distrust,  there  is  a  much  greater  proneness  to 
multiply,  than  diminish,  the  objects  of  faith.  It  is 
better,  says  Cicero,  to  think  nothing,  than  to  medi- 
tate evil.  Mil  sentire  est  melius,  quam  prava  sentire. 
We  may  say  the  same  of  belief.  It  is  better  to  have 
no  faith  at  all,  than  to  believe  what  is  false.  Addi- 
tions to  truth  are  errors,  and  from  these  have  chiefly 
arisen  divisions  and  discords ;  not  from  any  want  of 
faith  in  the  essential  truths  of  the  Gospel,  but  from 
a  belief,  or  a  pretended  belief,  in  many  things  not 
contained  there.  The  only  remedy  is  to  go  back  to 
the  Scriptures,  and  start  with  the  conviction,  that 
the  true  christian  faith  consists  in  believing  just 
enough  and  no  more. 

But  one  of  the  worst  effects  of  this  system  of  pre- 
scribing faith,  and  dictating  to  conscience,  has  been 
to  encourage  pride  and  a  mdignant  temper.  Slight 
divisions  have  grown  up  into  a  most  violent  rancour, 
which  has  increased  in  bitterness,  till  it  has  ended  in 
a  consummation  of  all  that  is  wicked  in  the  human 
heart,  the  spirit  of  intolerance  ;  that  spirit  whose 
breath  is  a  pestilence,  whose  touch  is  death,  and 
whose  delights  are  scenes  of  darkness  and  iniquity ; 
that  spirit,  which  Christ  censured  in  the  haughty, 
persecuting  Jews,  and  which  incited  these  same  Jews 
to  demand  his  death,  to  mock  at  his  suife  rings,  and 
revile  him  in  his  dying  moments ;  that  spirit,  which 
led  suft'ering  martyrs  to  the  stake  and  consigned  them 
to  the  flames  ;  which  darkened,  deluded,  and  tortured 
the  world  for  ages,  kindled  the  ferocious  zeal  of 
6 


42  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  i- 

bigotry,  forged  the  chains,  and  lighted  up  the  fag- 
gots of  persecution.  Shall  we  say,  that  this  spirit 
still  lives  ?  Does  it  not  live  in  the  hearts  of  those, 
who  would  reproach  and  disturb  others  for  their 
opinions,  and  who  are  more  zealous  to  show  their 
regard  for  the  faith,  than  for  the  essential  virtues  of 
the  christian  religion  ?  Does  it  not  live  where  mis- 
representation and  abuse  usurp  the  place  of  christian 
love  and  charity,  and  where  hatred  and  malevolence 
blot  out  the  kind  affections  ?  In  some  degree  it 
dwells  in  the  breast  of  every  man,  Avho  would  en- 
croach on  the  religious  liberty  of  another,  and  fix  a 
stigma  of  reproach  where  he  cannot  fasten  the 
chains  of  his  creed. 

How  is  it,  that  the  emotions  of  pity,  humanity, 
and  tenderness,  voluntarily  rise  up  when  we  behold 
our  fellow-men  in  trouble,  or  distress,  or  under  any 
temporal  calamity  ;  but  if  they  are  suspected  of  be- 
ing so  unfortunate  as  to  entertain  a  false  opinion,  or 
to  swerve  from  what  we  are  pleased  to  call  the  true 
faith,  they  are  at  once  denounced  and  shunned  as 
dangerous  to  society;  the  passions  are  inflamed;  they 
are  treated  rudely  ;  they  are  assaulted  with  the 
voice  of  menace  and  irritation  ;  the  milk  of  human 
kindness  seems  to  be  dried  up  from  its  source;  the 
currents  of  benevolence  and  sympathy  are  frozen 
in  their  channels?  Not  a  trace  can  be  detected  of 
that  mild,  and  forbearing,  and  gentle,  and  affection- 
ate spirit,  which  pervades  the  Gospel,  and  ought  to 
reside  in  the  breast  of  every  christian. 


i,ET.  ii.J  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  43 

Why  should  any  persons  desire  to  persecute  oth- 
ers, or  clamour  against  them,  because  they  cannot 
in  conscience  subscribe  to  the  same  articles,  nor 
bring  their  minds  to  receive  the  same  opinions  as 
themselves?  Is  any  one  injured  by  Avhat  others 
think?  Certainly  not.  Why  then  be  disturbed? 
Because,  some  have  said,  although  we  are  not  injured, 
God  is  dishonoured,  and  it  is  our  duty  to  vindicate 
his  honour,  and  support  the  cause  of  true  religion. 

Let  such  imitate  God.  Does  he  show  resent- 
ment ;  does  he  inflict  the  punishment  of  his  neglect 
and  displeasure  ;  does  he  pour  out  the  vials  of  his 
wrath  on  those  especially,  who  do  not  agree  with 
them  in  opinion  ?  Are  they  scorched  by  his  light- 
nings, or  do  his  thunders  burst  on  their  heads  alone  ? 
On  the  contrary,  are  not  all  equally  the  objects  of 
his  bounty  and  blessings,  his  paternal  care  and  pro- 
tecting providence  ?  Shall  we  have  the  vanity  and 
presumption  to  think,  that  we  are  vindicating  the 
honour  of  God,  by  pursuing  a  course  of  action  di- 
rectly opposed  to  all  his  dealings  Avith  men,  by  vio- 
lating his  commands,  and  doing  injury,  where  he  con- 
fers unmeasured  favours  ?  If  we  would  promote 
his  glory,  let  it  be  our  highest  concern  to  obey  and 
Imitate  him.  In  regard  to  our  differences  with  our 
brethren,  in  which  we  all  believe  ourselves  right, 
let  us  humbly  ask,  in  the  language  of  Paul,  "  Who 
maketh  us  to  differ?  What  have  we,  that  we  did 
not  receive  ?"  .  God  is  the  author  of  all ;  him  alone 
are  we  to  serve  ;  him  alone  are  we  to  please. 

Thus  have  we    briefly    developed  the    principal 
causes  of  the  evils,  which  the  protestant  church  at 


44  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  i. 

large  has  suffered.  The  influence  of  the  same  cau- 
ses may  be  followed  into  narrower  circles,  and  be 
found  no  less  destructive  of  religious  truth,  harmony, 
and  practice.  Churches  there  are,  which  profess  to 
unite  under  one  name,  and  which  come  together  at 
stated  times  in  the  form  of  a  Convocation,  Conven- 
tion, Association,  or  General  Assembly.  Each  of 
these  has  a  creed,  to  regulate  the  faith  of  the  whole 
body,  and  every  member  proffers  a  solemn  declara- 
tion, that  he  will  adhere  to  all  its  articles.  But 
Avhere  is  the  Convention,  or  the  Assembly,  in  which 
there  is  any  thing  like  a  unanimity  of  belief? 

Take  the  English  Church  for  an  example.  Have 
not  every  shade  and  gradation  of  sentiments,  many 
of  which  are  as  opposite  to  each  other  as  , light  to 
darkness,  been  zealously  and  pertinaciously  taught 
in  that  church,  in  defiance  of  the  three  Creeds  and 
the  thirly-nine  Articles?  Take  the  Presbyterian 
Church  for  another  example.  Is  it  not  a  notorious 
fact,  that  many  in  this  enclosure  are  Hopkinsians 
and  Arminians,  and  that  a  very  small  portion  believe 
literally  in  all  the  dogmas  of  the  Westminster  Di- 
vines? No  one  will  deny  these  facts.  And  is  not 
the  inference  just,  that  imposing  a  formulary,  which 
thus  ensnares  men's  souls,  is  a  source  of  incalculable 
injury  to  pure  religion  ?  It  leads  either  to  hypocri- 
sy, to  violations  of  a  sacred  agreement,  or  to  down- 
right excommunication,  either  of  which  justly  brings 
a  scandal  on  the  christian  profession. 

The  Congregationalists,  and  perhaps  other  sects, 
have  another  practice.       Not  content  with  the  con- 


LET.  n.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  45 

fessions,  creeds,  and  platforms,  bequeathed  to  thein 
by  their  fathers,  as  pillars  of  support  to  the  fabric  of 
their  faith,  separate  congregations  have  taken  care 
doubly  to  fortify  themselves  by  minor  formularies,  or 
covenants,  to  the  fashion  of  which  every  member 
must  be  conformed.  Into  these  choice  symbols  you 
will  often  find  wrought  all  the  mysteries  of  school 
divinity,  ontology,  pneumatology,  and  metaphysics,  to 
which  the  most  untutored  mind  in  the  parish  must 
acknowledge  his  undoubting  assent  and  consent,  be- 
fore he  can  be  admitted  to  the  privileges  of  a  chris- 
tian. Here  you  have  the  poison  of  this  system  ex- 
tending to  the  minutest  ramifications  of  society. 
You  may  behold  its  effects  in  the  divisions  of  church- 
es, law-suits  about  church  property,  quarrels  among 
neighbours,  altercations  among  friends,  and  irrecon- 
cileable  alienations  supplanting  good  fellowship  and 
kind  feelings. 

Let  it  be  observed,  however,  that  the  mischief  of 
creed-making  does  not  arise  simply  from  bringing 
together  a  set  of  articles,  to  which  any  one  is  ready 
to  subscribe.  Every  man's  faith  is  in  some  sense  a 
creed,  and  in  itself  considered  there  is  no  more 
crime  in  writing  it  out,  than  there  is  in  thinking  it 
over  in  his  mind.  It  is  not  writing  it,  nor  arranging 
it  into  articles,  nor  endeavouring  by  fair  argument  to 
convince  others  of  its  truth,  that  clothes  it  with  dan- 
ger, and  converts  it  into  an  instrument  of  disorgani- 
zation and  oppression.  It  would  certainly  be  much 
better  to  be  guided  by  Scripture  language,  and  be 
satisfied  with  the  words  of  divine  wisdom,  yet  there 


46  eilARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [vAm  i. 

can  be  no  essential  harm  in  telling  the  world  what 
we  believe  in  our  own  way,  provided  we  are  dispos- 
ed to  go  no  farther.  But,  unfortunately,  no  one  is 
contented  to  stop  here ;  nor  have  creeds  ever  been 
made  for  the  pur[)ose  alone  of  expressing  what  their 
makers  believed.  They  have  invariably  been  de- 
signed to  operate  on  the  minds  of  others;  they  have 
been  thrust  forward  as  tests  of  a  true  faith ;  they 
have  been  imposed  as  conditions  of  christian  fellow- 
ship. In  this  consists  their  mischief,  in  their  usurpa- 
tion, their  encroachment  on  right,  their  assault  on 
conscience,  their  exclusive,  intolerant  tendency.* 

The  argument  of  this  letter  conducts  us  to  a  sin- 
gle result,  which  is,  that  by  far  the  largest  portion 
of  divisions,  disorders,  and  wickedness  prevalent  in 
the  christian  church  since  the  Reformation,  may  be 
distinctly  referred  to  causes  in  all  respects  opposed  to 
the  principles  of  Unitarianism.     With  Unitarians  the 


*  The  following  are  the  pertinent  remarks  of  Dr.  Chandler,  in  alluding  to 
the  persecuting  habit  of  dictating  articles  of  faith. 

"  As  ecclesiastical  history  gives  us  so  dreadful  an  account  of  the  melancholy 
and  tragical  effects  of  this  practice,  one  would  think,  that  no  nation,  who 
knew  the  wortii  of  liberty,  no  christian  protestant  church,  that  had  any  regard 
for  the  peace  of  the  flock  of  Christ,  sliould  ever  be  found  to  authorize  and 
continue  it. 

"  What  security,  then,  shall  we  have  left  us  for  truth  and  orthodoxy,  when 
our  subscriptions  are  gone  .'  Why,  the  sacred  Scriptures,  those  oracles  of 
the  great  God,  and  freedom  and  liberty  to  understand  and  interpret  them  as 
wc  can.  The  consetiuence  of  this  would  be  great  integrity  and  peace  of  con- 
science, in  the  enjoyment  of  our  religious  principles;  union  and  friendship 
amongst  christians,  notwithstanding  all  their  differences  in  judgment.  Wc 
shall  lose  only  the  incumbrances  of  religion,  our  bones  of  contention,  the 
shackles  of  our  consciences,  and  the  snares  to  honesty  and  virtue  ;  whilst  all 
that  is  substantially  good  and  valuable,  all  that  is  truly  divine  and  heavenly, 
would  remain  to  enrich  and  bless  us."  Introduction  to  a  Translation  of  Lim 
bnrrh's  History  of  (he  Inquisition,  p.  110. 


LET.  II.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS,  47 

Bible  is  paramount  to  all  other  authority  ;  they  ac- 
count it  a  sacred  duty  to  maintain  a  perfect  liberty 
of  thought,  inquiry,  and  judgment.  They  do  not  ad- 
mit, that  any  one,  with  justice  to  himself,  and  integ- 
rity to  the  christian  cause,  can  transfer  this  preroga- 
tive to  another.  Religion  connects  every  man  with 
his  Maker  by  personal  responsibility  and  obligations 
of  duty,  and  not  through  the  medium  of  other  men's 
thoughts  and  advice.  The  welfare  of  his  soul  de- 
pends on  what  he  shall  alone  think,  resolve,  and  do. 
All  the  opinions  of  all  the  world  would  not  make  him 
a  christian,  nor  bring  him  one  step  nearer  to  his  God, 
unless  he  were  faithful  to  his  own  understanding 
and  conscience. 

The  slightest  attempt  to  bind  him  to  a  particular 
notion,  or  to  make  him  turn  traitor  to  the  unbiassed 
reflections  of  his  own  mind,  is  an  insult  to  his  nature, 
and  a  presumptuous  attack  on  his  moral  freedom. 
To  attempts  of  this  sort,  as  we  have  seen,  are  to  be 
ascribed  almost  all  the  evils,  which,  in  one  shape  or 
another,  have  spread  devastation  and  misery  over  the 
christian  world,  and  counteracted  the  benign  influ- 
ence of  a  holy  religion.  And  they  have  been  start- 
ed and  prosecuted  in  violation  of  the  spirit  of  Unita- 
rianism. 

This  is  no  less  true  in  principle,  than  fact.  Unita- 
rians have  not  participated  in  the  causes,  which 
have  produced  these  disasters.  One  reason  is,  to 
be  sure,  that  the  smallness  of  their  numbers  has  pre- 
vented their  having  power  to  do  much  good  or  harm. 
But  this  does  not  weaken   the  argument.     It  only 


48  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  I- 

lays  the  burden  more  heavily  on  the  orthodox 
themselves,  and  compels  them  to  admit,  that  the 
persecutions,  and  violence,  and  enormous  wickedness, 
which  every  serious  heart  deplores,  have  actually 
grown  out  of  their  sentiments.  Unitarians  have  had 
no  agency  in  the  affair.  The  spirit  of  orthodoxy  has 
reigned  triumphant ;  it  has  done  all,  that  has  been 
done. 

Now,  whatever  charges  may  be  advanced  against 
the  particular  opinions  of  Unitarians,  it  must  at  all 
events  be  granted,  that  experience  and  the  history 
of  the  church  exhibit  effects  of  orthodoxy  quite  as 
terrible  as  any,  which  the  most  vivid  imagination  has 
pictured  to  itself  in  the  train  of  these  opinions. 
While  engaged  in  examining  particular  sentiments  in 
regard  to  their  moral  tendency,  it  is  proper  to  keep 
this  fact  in  mind,  and  also  to  remember,  that  the 
principles  of  orthodoxy  have  been  thoroughly  tried 
in  all  their  varieties,  and  under  every  circumstance 
of  place,  time,  government,  laws,  forms  of  discipline, 
and  ecclesiastical  order.  They  have  been  tried  and 
found  wanting.  Not  that  I  would  use  this  as  a  proof 
of  the  truth,  or  perfection,  of  Unitarian  sentiments  ; 
these  must  stand  on  their  own  merits;  but  I  do 
contend,  that  this  fact,  so  broad  and  well  established, 
is  a  strong  evidence  against  the  moral  influence  of 
orthodoxy,  as  opposed  to  Unitarlanlsm.  It  is  a  prac- 
tical demonstration  in  respect  to  the  combined  action 
of  a  system,  and  ought  to  have  much  weight  in  con- 
firming the  coincident  results  of  theory  and  argument, 


t.ET.  ir.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  49 

as  applied  to  the  individual  parts  of  which  that  sys- 
tem is  composed. 

I  shall  now  proceed  to  the  specific  charges,  which 
you  and  others  have  made  against  the  character  and 
opinions  of  Unitarians.  I  hope  to  make  it  appear 
from  fact,  and  reason,  and  Scripture,  that  these  char- 
ges have  been  thrown  out  with  more  haste  than  dis- 
cretion, more  zeal  than  knowledge,  more  vehemence 
than  judgment.  The  spirit  and  latitude  of  your 
charges  naturally  draw  me  into  somewhat  of  an  ex- 
tended view  of  the  subject.  You  attack  character 
and  principles.  These  shall  be  defended  both  on 
their  own  grounds,  and  by  comparing  them  with  the 
character  and  principles  of  the  orthodox.  This  is 
the  only  mode  in  which  the  subject  can  be  fully  and 
fairly  exammed. 

The  task,  I  am  aware,  has  its  difficulties.  Noth- 
ing is  more  easy,  than  for  the  mind  to  run  into  ex- 
tremes in  pursuing  a  favourite  train  of  thought  or  in- 
yestigation.  This  is  particularly  true  in  following 
what  we  deem  false  opinions  to  their  results. 
Imaginary  consequences  thicken  around  us  as  we  ad- 
vance ;  we  soon  persuade  ourselves  that  they  are 
real  ;  and  then  we  are  ready  to  charge  them  to  the 
account  of  our  opponents.  "  How  often,"  says  Watts, 
when  alluding  to  this  mode  of  inquiry,  in  his  admira- 
ble Essay  on  Uncharitableness,  "  how  often  do  we 
put  their  opinions  upon  the  rack  ;  we  torture  every 
joint  and  article  of  them,  till  we  have  forced  them 
to  confess  some  formidable  errors,  which  their  au- 
thors never  knew  or  dreamed  of.  Thus  the  original 
7 


aO  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  i. 

notions  appear  with  a  friglitful  aspect,  and  the  secta- 
tors  of  them  grow  to  be  the  object  of  our  abhorrence, 
and  have  forfeited  their  right  to  every  grain  of  our 
charity."  This  is  no  doubt  a  natural  tendency  of 
our  zeal  for  cherished  opinions,  and  an  eagerness  to 
spy  out  something  alarming  in  those  of  an  opposite 
kind.  It  can  hardly  be  hoped,  perhaps,  that  this 
zeal  will  be  entirely  extinguished  in  prosecutmg  such 
an  investigation,  as  the  one  on  which  we  are  now  en- 
tered. Let  a  knowledge  of  its  existence  and  bearing- 
teach  us  a  lesson  of  caution,  moderation,  candour,  and 
charity,  if  it  do  no  more. 


LKTTEIl  HI. 

On  Charges  against  the  Character  of  Unitarians. 

SIR, 

1  HAVE  read  your  Ordination  Sermon,  preached 
some  time  since  at  Baltimore,  and  propose  olfering 
for  your  consideration  a  few  remarks  on  that  part 
particularly,  which  relates  to  Unitarians.  Many 
persons  have  been  at  a  loss  to  conjecture,  what  evil 
star  could  induce  you  to  select  that  occasion  for  mak- 
ing so  violent  and  unprovoked  an  attack  on  a  class  of 
christians,  who  have  shown  no  disposition  to  molest 
you,  nor  the  society,  which  you  had  the  honour  to 
address.     And  I  confess   myself  among  the  number 


LET.  III.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  51 

of  those,  who  have  not  been  able  to  reconcile  your 
conduct  with  the  maxims  of  christian  faith  and  prac- 
tice, by  which  I  could  not  doubt  you  aimed  to  be 
guided. 

It  was  easy  to  conceive,  that  you  might  have  no 
very  high  respect  for  the  opinions  of  Unitarians,  be- 
cause your  own  are  so  widely  different.  Nor  was  it 
difficult  to  imagine,  that  you  might  regard  these 
opinions  as  errors,  and  might  look  with  concern  on  . 
the  spiritual  condition  of  those,  who  were  so  unfor- 
tunate as  to  embrace  them.  You  might  think  it  ne- 
cessary, on  suitable  occasions,  to  point  out  such  er- 
rors, to  confute  them  by  fair  and  temperate  argu- 
ment, and  to  make  known  their  dangerous  tendency. 
It  was  easy  to  suppose,  that  your  love  of  truth,  your 
sincerity,  and  your  zeal  in  the  cause  of  pure  religion, 
might  prompt  you  to  so  benevolent  and  pious  a  work. 
All  this,  done  with  moderation,  and  a  proper  spirit, 
would  not  only  be  pardonable,  but  praise-worthy. 
It  is  every  preacher's  duty  to  support  what  he  thinks 
to  be  truth,  and  by  all  just  and  honourable  means  to 
dig  away  what  he  conceives  to  be  the  sandy  founda- 
tions of  error. 

But  you  have  taken  a  course  widely  different  from 
this.  Instead  of  coming  forward  to  detect  and  con- 
fute the  dangerous  opinions  of  Unitarians,  instead  of 
attempting  to  convince  them  by  argument,  and  to  win 
them  from  their  errors  by  affectionate  persuasion 
and  salutary  warnings,  you  have  at  the  outset  fixed 
on  them  the  mark  of  heresy,  denied  to  them  the 
christian  name,  and  accused  them  of  immorality  and 


52  CHARGES    AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  i. 

irreligion  in  practice.  You  seem  equally  unwilling 
to  allow  them  the  name  of  christians,  the  praise 
of  icoodncss,  and  the  credit  of  honest  intentions. 

But  before  1  proceed  further,  I  will  quote  your 
own  words.  After  relating  to  your  readers  the  story 
of  Paul  of  Samosata  and  Queen  Zenobia,  and  assur-^ 
ing  them  '•  that  great  cities  have  commonly  been,  in 
all  ages,  the  hot  beds  of  error,"  you  go  on  as  follows. 

"  In  great  cities,  likewise,  or,  at  least,  in  states  of  societ}'  simi- 
lar to  what  is  commonly  found  in  such  places,  has  generally 
commenced  that  fatal  decline  from  orthodoxy,  which  began, 
perhaps,  with  calling  in  question  some  of  what  are  styled  the 
more  rigid  peculiarities  of  received  creeds,  and  ended  in  em- 
bracing the  dreadful,  soul-destroying  errors  of  Arius  or  Socinus. 
We  might  easily  illustrate  and  contirm  this  position,  Vy  exam- 
ples, drawn  from  our  own  countrj',  had  we  time  to  trace  the 
history  of  several  sects  among  us,  and  especially  of  American 
Unitarianism.  But  I  forbear  to  pursue  the  illustration  farther : 
and  shall  only  take  the  liberty  to  ask,  as  1  pass  along — How  it 
is  to  be  accounted  for,  that  the  preaching  of  those  who  deny  the 
Divinity  and  Atonement  of  the  Saviour,  and  who  reject  the  doc- 
trines of  Human  Depravity,  of  Regeneration,  and  of  Justifica- 
tion by  the  righteousness  of  Christ— How,  I  ask,  is  it  to  be  ac- 
counted for,  that  such  preachers,  all  over  the  world,  are  most 
acceptable  to  the  gay,  the  fashionable,  the  worldly-minded,  and 
even  the  licentious  ?  That  so  many  embrace  and  eulogize 
their  system,  without  being,  in  the  smallest  perceptible  degree, 
sanctified  by  it?  'J  hat  thousands  are  in  love  with  it,  and  praise 
it ;  but  that  we  look  in  vain  for  the  monuments  of  its  reforming 
and  purifying  power  ?  I  will  not  pretend  to  answer  these  ques-5 
tions;  but  leave  them  to  the  consciences  of  those  who  believe, 
that  the  genuine  doctrines  of  the  Gospel  always  have  had,  and 
always  will  have,  a  tendency  to  promote  holiness  of  heart  and  of 
life  ;  and  that  wc  must  all  speedily  appear  before  the  judgment 
vSPat  of  Christ." 


AET,  III.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  53 

To  these  singular  remarks,  you  add  the  following 
in  the  form  of  a  note. 

"  The  aboye  language,  concerning  the  destructive  nature  of 
the  Arian  and  Soc'mian  heresies,  has  not  been  adopted  lightly  ; 
but  is  the  result  of  serious  deliberation,  and  deep  conviction. 
And  in  conformity  vpith  this  view  of  the  subject,  the  Author 
cannot  forbear  to  notice  and  record  a  declaration  made  to  him- 
self, by  the  late  Dr.  Priestley,  two  or  three  years  before  the  de- 
cease of  that  distinguished  Unitarian.  The  conversation  was  a 
free  and  amicable  one,  on  some  of  the  fundamental  doctrines  of 
religion.  In  reply  to  a  direct  avowal  on  the  part  of  the  Author, 
that  he  was  a  Trinitarian  and  a  Calvinist.,  Dr.  Priestley  said — '•  I 
do  not  wonder  that  you  Calvinists  entertain  and  express  a  strong- 
ly unfavourable  opinion  of  us  Unitarians.  The  truth  is,  there 
neither  can,  nor  ought  to  be,  any  compromise  between  us.  If 
yot  are  right,  we  are  not  christians  at  all;  and  if  ■rue  are 
right,  vou  are  gross  idolaters.'  These  were,  as  nearly  as  can 
be  recollected,  the  words,  and,  most  accurately,  the  substance 
of  his  remark.  And  nothing,  certainly,  can  be  more  just.  Be- 
tween those  who  believe  in  the  Divinity  and  Atonement  of  the 
Son  of  God,  and  those  who  entirely  reject  both,  '  there  is  a  great 
gulpk  fixed.,''  which  precludes  all  ecclesiastical  intercourse. 
The  former  may  greatly  respect  and  love  the  latter,  on  account 
of  other  qualities  and  attainments ;  but  certainly  cannot  regard 
them  as  christians,  in  any  correct  sense  of  the  word ;  or  any 
more  in  the  way  of  salvation,  than  Mohammedans  or  Jews.'''' 

Such  is  the  language,  which  you  incorporated  into 
an  ordination  sermon.  The  charges  contained  in 
these  quotations,  you  will  allow  to  be  of  no  ordi- 
nary kind.  It  IS  no  trifling  thing  for  any  class  of 
christians  to  be  excluded  in  a  body  from  the  pale 
of  Christianity,  and  openly  accused  of  licencious- 
ness  and  immorality.  In  the  remarks  about  to 
be  made,  it  will  be  taken  for  granted,  that  your  char- 


54  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [parti. 

ges  were  aimed  exclusively  at  those  persons  wher- 
ever they  may  be  found,  who  call  themselves  Unita- 
rians. That  they  do,  or  do  not  hold  to  the  opinions, 
which  you  attribute  to  them,  is  a  thing  of  no  conse- 
quence as  it  respects  my  present  purpose.  Your  at- 
tack is  directed  at  tlie  moral  character  of  Unitarian 
believers,  not  as  the  speculative  and  probable  result 
of  the  nature,  or  tendency  of  their  opinions,  but  as  it 
actually  exists.  It  is  the  correctness  of  your  asser- 
tions on  this  point,  Avhich  is  now  to  be  examined. 
By  what  authority  has  it  been  declared,  that  among 
Unitarians,  you  "  look  in  vain  for  the  monuments  of 
the  reforming  and  purifying  power"  of  their  reli- 
gious sentiments? 

It  is,  indeed,  to  be  regretted,  that  you  did  not 
find  "time  to  trace  the  history  of  American  Unita- 
rianism,"  before  you  ventured  such  a  declaration. 
By  such  a  process,  perhaps,  the  public  might  have 
become  acquainted  with  facts,  from  which  the 
strength  of  this  position  would  be  more  manifest. 
Or  was  it  supposed,  that  in  passing  sentence  of  con- 
demnation on  a  large  portion  of  the  christians  of  this 
country,  and  in  pubhshing  against  them  the  charge  of 
immorality,  there  was  no  occasion  to  exhibit  testimo- 
ny? Could  it  be  imagined,  that  the  persons  against 
whom  such  an  attack  was  made,  would  quietly  sub- 
mit to  have  their  characters  impeached,  without  ex- 
posing unguarded  asseverations,  and  demanding  evi- 
dence? Although  they  were  denied  the  privilege 
and  name  o{  christiajis,  it  could  not  be  forgotten,  that 
they  are  men,  and  as  such  can  feel  an  injury,  and  per- 


LET.  HI.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIAIVS.  55 

ceive  a  violation  of  justice  and  the  common  laws  of 
humanity,  as  quickly  as  other  men  of  whom  it  might 
be  thought  a  christian  duty  to  speak  in  better  terms. 
Let  me  first  ask,  for  what  purpose  was  this  anec- 
dote about  Dr.  Priestley  introduced?  What  does  it 
prove  ?  I  am  willing  to  believe,  that  Dr.  Priestley 
said  precisely  what  is  here  put  into  his  mouth,  and 
yet  I  cannot  see  the  least  connexion  between  these 
premises  and  your  conclusion.  Was  it  fair  or  hon- 
ourable to  quote  language,  which  had  been  used  in 
private  and  friendly  conversation,  and  this  from  me- 
mory, after  a  lapse  of  twenty  years  ;  was  it  fair  to 
quote  such  language  as  a  proof,  that  a  large  body  of 
professed  Christians  have  no  title  to  this  name,  and 
are  "  no  more  in  the  way  of  salvation,  than  Moham- 
medans or  Jews  ?"  But  waving  this  consideration, 
pray  in  what  respect  are  the  words  of  Dr.  Priestley 
to  your  purpose,  except  on  the  supposition,  that  your 
opinions  are  certainly  right,  and  his  certainly  wrong? 
If  Trinitarianism  be,  indeed,  the  true  doctrine,  then 
we  have  the  authority  of  Dr.  Priestley,  to  warrant  us 
in  saying,  that  Unitarians  "are  not  christians  at  all.'"' 
And  it  is  only  on  this  condition,  that  his  authority  in 
any  degree  sanctions  your  conclusions.  Nay,  let  it 
be  admitted,  that  Dr.  Priestley  actually  believed  Uni- 
tarians to  be  no  christians,  or  Trinitarians  to  be  idola- 
ters, or  any  thing  else,  would  this  verily  make  it  so? 
And  above  all,  are  the  opinions  of  an  individual  to  be 
taken  as  the  groundwork  of  a  sentence  of  condem- 
nation on  a  numerous  class  of  christians,  who  mav. 


56  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  I. 

or  may  not,  agree  in  adopting  the  views  of  that  in- 
dividual. 

Since,  then,  this  anecdote  proves  nothing,  it  is  dif- 
ficult to  tell  why  it  should  be  thought  so  important 
as  to  be  recorded  in  a  book.  By  making  Dr.  Priest- 
ley speak  this  language,  and  giving  it  such  a  construc- 
tion, as  you  would  have  it  bear,  he  is  exhibited  in  a 
character  directly  opposite  to  that,  in  which  he  ap- 
peared during  his  whole  life.  In  him  no  traits  were 
more  remarkable,  than  his  mild  and  amiable  temper, 
his  benevolent  and  christian  spirit,  and  his  desire  to 
open  the  door  of  christian  fellowship  to  all  the  be- 
lievers in  Jesus,  and  followers  of  his  word.  And 
yet,  his  authority  is  here  used  to  justify  one  of  the 
severest  censures,  which  one  christian  cduld  pro- 
nounce on  another,  and  to  sanction  against  persons, 
whose  opinions  resemble  his,  a  sentence  of  total  ex- 
clusion, not  only  from  all  ecclesiastical  intercourse, 
but  from  the  common  privileges  of  christians. 

In  regard  to  the  charge  of  licentiousness  and  immo- 
rality, which  you  have  made  against  Unitarians,  you 
must  not  think  me  importunate  in  making  a  few  di- 
rect and  particular  inquiries.  Let  me  ask,  whether 
you  have  the  testimony  of  your  own  experience? 
Have  you  lived  in  the  society  of  Unitarians,  and  do 
you  judge  from  personal  observation  ?  Have  you 
had  any  direct  means  whatever  of  knowing  the  prac- 
tical effects  of  their  principles?  These  questions,  it 
is  presumed,  will  be  answered  in  the  negative.  And 
was  it  not  premature,  to  say  the  least,  thus  to  im- 
peach the  morals  of  a  class  of  christians,  without  hav- 


LET.  III.]  CHARGES   AGAINST    UNITARIANS.  57 

ini^  from  experience  a  most  Intimate  knowledge  of 
facts?  Hearsay,  anJ  rumour,  and  conjecture  were 
not  enoui^li  in  so  grave  a  matter. 

Although  you  had  never  witnessed  the  state  of 
morals  or  religion  in  a  society  composed  wholly  of 
Unitarians,  you  were  undoubtedly  acquainted  with 
individuals  of  this  belief,  and  some,  perhaps,  whom 
you  have  reason  to  call  your  friends.  And  have  you, 
indeed,  found  among  these  persons  such  marks  of 
depravity  and  irreligion,  that  you  feel  authorized 
from  their  example  to  fix  a  stigma,  and  pass  a  sen- 
tence of  reprobation  on  a  whole  sect?  If  it  had 
been  your  misfortune  to  meet  only  with  such  char- 
acters among  Unitarians,  and  you  judged  from  what 
you  saw,  it  would  have  been  but  doing  justice  to 
the  great  body  of  those,  who  profess  their  belief,  to 
let  the  public  know  the  source,  as  well  as  the  extent 
of  your  information.  As  your  charges  stand  at  pre- 
sent, your  readers  are  called  on  to  believe,  that  they 
are  applicable  "all  over  the  world."  And  although 
you  might  think  your  conclusions  deduced  by  good  lo- 
gic, others  might  not,  and  in  a  case  of  so  much  im- 
portance, it  would  have  seemed  proper  at  least  to 
make  your  antecedent  propositions  as  clear  as  your 
deductions. 

Let  me  inquire  further,  and  call  your  attention  par- 
ticularly to  that  portion  of  the  country,  where  Unita- 
rian principles  have  been  long  prevalent,  and  where 
they  are  embraced  by  a  large  portion  of  the  commu- 
nity. Are  you  prepared  to  charge  the  people  of 
Boston,  and  its  vicinity,  with  a  higher  degree  of  im- 
8 


58  CHARGES  AGAIAST  Ui\lTARIA-\S,  [^-^'^'^  ^^ 

morality,  and  depravity  of  manners,  than  is  fomid  irt 
other  cities?  Are  you  prepared  to  say,  that  the 
churches  in  that  place,  more  than  in  any  other,  arc 
filled  with  the  "gay,  the  fashionable,  the  worldly 
minded,  and  the  licentious  ?"  In  Boston,  if  any 
where,  may  be  found  a  proof  of  your  assertions,  be- 
cause in  that  place  the  Unitarians  probably  make  the 
most  numerous  class  of  society.  But  will  you  come 
before  the  public  with  any  attempt  to  exhibit  such 
proof?  No.  You  will  not  assail  the  moral  charac- 
ter of  a  great  number  of  the  leading  and  most  re- 
spectable members  of  society.  You  will  never  inves- 
tigate the  state  of  manners,  the  charitable  and  reli- 
gious institutions,  the  morals  and  practical  piety  of 
Unitarians,  as  a  body,  in  any  place,  and  then,  publish 
the  result  of  your  investigation,  as  a  proof,  that  they 
arc  more  "  worldly  minded"  or  "  licentious,"  than 
christians  of  other  denominations.  This  is  an  at- 
tempt in  which  you  never  will  engage. 

It  is  true,  you  have  hinted  at  discoveries,  Avhich 
might  be  made,  had  you  ^'  time  to  trace  the  history 
of  American  Unitaiianism."  Was  not  this  an  unfair 
insinuation?  Your  readers  arc  left  to  imagine  much 
evil  concealed,  which  nothing  but  want  of  time  pre- 
vents you  from  bringing  to  light.  It  is  incumbent  on 
you  to  disabuse  them  by  tracing  this  history.  Let  it 
be  done  impartially,  and  then  comj)ared  with  the 
history  of  the  Presbyterian  church,  or  of  any  other 
church,  and  no  Unitarian  will  shrink  from  the  paral- 
lel. He  will  want  no  better  illustration  of  the  com- 
parative moral  iniluence  of  his  principles,  and  no 
clearer  refutation  of  vour  charges. 


LET.  III.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  59 

In  regard  to  Unitarians  generally,    I  do  not  doubt, 
that  there  are  some    among   them,   whose  lives  and 
conduct  are  not  so  much  influenced  by  religious  prin- 
ciples, as  every  good  man  and  pious  christian  could 
wish.     But  I  would  gladly  be  informed,  if  there  are 
no  such  among  the  Presbyterians,  and  other  denomi- 
nations ?      Are  all  sects  immaculate,  but  Unitarians  ? 
Unless  this  be  the  case,   on  what  principles  of  jus- 
tice are  these  singled  out,  as  worthy   of   special  de- 
nunciation ?     Unitarians  are  not  in  the  habit  of  pro- 
claiming their  virtues,  and  their  religious  acts  from 
the    house-top.     Pii  orant   tacit i.     Piety  adores    in 
silence.     They  consider  religion  a  thing,  in  which  a 
man  is  intimately  concerned  with  his  Maker.     Where 
it  does  not  exist  in  the  heart,  speak  to  the  conscience 
in  the  still  small  voice  of  heavenly  truth,  and  exercise 
a  controlling  influence   over  the  atfections   and  the 
will,  they  look  on  pretensions,  show,  and  loud  profes- 
sions as  proving  little  else,  than   hypocrisy  and  delu- 
sion.     Perhaps  they  do  not  make  so  much  parade  and 
noise  about  religion,  as  some  others  ;  but  even  allow- 
ing this,  it  still  remains  to  be  proved,  that  they  have 
less   of  the  humble  spirit   of  fervent  piety,   less  of 
earnestness  in  their  devotions,  and  of  ardour  in  their 
love  and  pursuit  of  truth,  less,  indeed,  of  any  of  those 
qualities,  which  our  Saviour  has  declared  to  be  re- 
quisite in   his   sincere   and  faithful  followers.     Now 
these  are  things,   which  have  not  been  proved,   and 
which  it  is  not  likely  you  will  undertake  to  prove. 

The  truth  is,  that,  in  modern  times,  at  least,  Uni- 
tarianism  has  every  where  been  an  unpopular  faith. 
It  is  embraced  at  the  expense  of  many  sacrifices  of 


60  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [part  r. 

personal  interest  and  influence,  of  the  aiTection  of 
friends,  and  the  esteem  of  tlie  world.  Unitarians  of 
the  present  daj,  both  in  this  country  and  in  England, 
are  converts  from  the  diflerent  sects  of  orthodoxy. 
They  have  changed  their  seiitiments  from  serious 
conviction,  founded  on  inquiry  and  a  desire  of  truth. 
Every  inducement,  which  the  world  could  hold  out, 
every  motive,  which  could  spring  from  a  love  of  self, 
or  a  prospect  of  future  gain,  or  a  hoj>e  of  temporal 
aggrandizement,  has  conspired  to  try  their  integrity, 
and  to  keep  them  in  the  ranks  of  orthodoxy.  They 
have  resisted  all.  The  silent  voice  of  conscience  has 
been  more  powerful  with  them,  than  the  clamours  of 
the  world.  Upheld  by  the  majesty  of  truth,  and  the 
rectitude  of  good  intention,  they  have  shut  their  ears 
to  the  cry  of  heresy,  infidelity,  and  irreligion  ;  they 
have  submitted  to  the  assaults  of  bigotry  and  perse- 
cution ;  they  have  willingly  suffered  the  reproaches, 
and  given  up  the  good  opinion  of  mcjii,  for  the  com- 
mands of  Christ,  and  the  consolations  of  a  scriptural 
faith. 

In  conduct  like  this  do  you  discover  no  indications 
of  a  moral  sense,  and  a  righteous  purpose  ?  What 
laws  of  human  nature  bring  you  to  the  conclusion, 
that  a  large  class  of  persons  have  voluntarily  resign- 
ed many  of  their  worldly  advantages,  their  privileges 
and  attachments,  and  submitted  to  become  the  by- 
word of  their  brethren,  whom  they  have  loved  and 
respected,  and  exj)osed  themselves  to  all  the  odious 
charges,  which  willing  credulity  and  ignorant  zeal 
could  devise,  and  yet  have  no  claims  to  the  merit  of 


i.KT.  III.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  61 

pure  motives  and  virtuous  action  ?  Almost  every 
Unitarian,  in  the  very  circumstance  of  avowing  his 
sentiments,  has  exhibited  as  strong  a  testimony  as  he 
could  exhibit,  of  his  sincerity,  his  high  value  of  reli- 
gious truth,  and  his  deep  sense  of  religious  obligation. 
If  he  had  any  objects  of  selfishness  to  advance,  any 
schemes  of  power  or  of  profit  to  execute,  or  any 
other  ends  to  attain,  which  are  desirable  in  the  eyes 
of  the  "  worldly-minded,''  and  near  the  heart  of  the 
"licentious,"  would  his  first  step  be  to  forfeit  the 
good  will,  and  put  himself  beyond  the  patronage  of 
those,  who  are  best  able  to  help  him  forward  ? 

Your  charges  have  an  apjjlication  more  extensive, 
than  may  at  first  appear.  They  reach  to  some  of  the 
greatest,  wisest,  and  best  men,  who  have  adorned  the 
world.  Your  sweeping  denunciation  embraces  all 
Unitarians  of  every  age  and  country.  If  your  char- 
ges are  well-founded,  Newton,  Locke,  and  Chilling- 
worth,  were  "  no  christians  in  any  correct  sense  of 
the  word,  nor  any  more  In  the  way  of  salvation,  than 
Mohammedans  or  Jews?"  And  even  Lardner,  whom 
all  parties  honour  as  the  best  of  men,  and  unanimous- 
ly quote,  as  the  most  learned  and  able  advocate  of 
the  christian  cause,  must  come  under  the  same  cen- 
sure. 

Those  ornaments  of  the  Episcopal  church.  Dr. 
Samuel  Clarke,  Hoadly,  Law,  and  Biackburne,  must 
be  ranked  with  those,  among  Avhom  "  we  look  In 
vain  for  the  monuments  of  the  reforming  and  purify- 
ing power"  of  their  faith.  The  charge  of  immorali- 
ty, of  preaching  to  please  and  win  the  "  licentious," 


62  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [rART  i. 

and  of  "  not  being  in  the  smallest  degree  sanctified," 
by  their  religion,  must  rest  against  such  men  as  Em- 
Ijn,  Whiston,  Priestley,  Lindsey,  Price,  Jebb,  Wake- 
field, Chandler,  Taylor,  Benson,  Cappe,  Foster,  Kip- 
pis,  and  a  host  of  others  among  the  English  Unitari- 
ans, against  Avhose  moral  character  the  tongue  of 
slander  has  never  ventured  to  raise  a  whisper.* 

What  excuse  can  be  offered  for  the  injustice  done 
to  the  names  of  these  men,  by  implicating  their  char- 
acters, and  asserting  the  immoral  effects  of  those 
principles,  which  they  believed  to  be  the  foundation 


*  This  observation  may  be  verified  by  turning  to  any  notices  of  tlie  charac- 
ter of  these  men,  whether  from  tlieir  friends  or  enemies.  Two  or  three  exam- 
ples shall  be  selected. 

The  following  testimony  to  the  excellent  character  of  Dr.  Pricptley,  is  from 
the  pen  of  the  celebrated  Dr.  Samuel  Parr,  who  knew  him  well.  It  is  con- 
tained in  his  letter  from  Irenopolis  to  the  inhabitants  of  Eleuthropolis.  "  I  con- 
fess with  sorrow,  that  in  too  many  instances,  such  modes  of  defence  have  been 
used  against  this  formidable  Heresiarch,  as  would  hardly  be  justifiable  in  the 
support  of  revelation  itself,  against  the  arrogance  of  a  Bolingbroke,  the  buffoon- 
ery of  a  Mandeville,  and  the  levity  of  a  Voltaire.  But  the  cause  of  orthodoxy 
requires  not  such  aids.  The  church  of  England  approves  them  not.  The 
spirit  of  Christianity  warrants  them  not.  Let  Dr.  Priestley  be  confuted  where 
he  is  mistaken.  Let  him  be  exposed  where  he  is  superficial.  Let  him  be  re- 
buked where  he  is  censorious.  Let  him  be  repressed  where  he  is  dogmatical. 
But  let  not  his  attainments  be  depreciated,  because  they  are  numerous  almost 
without  a  parallel.  Let  not  his  talents  be  ridiculed,  because  they  are  superla- 
tively great.  Let  not  his  morals  be  vilified,  because  they  are  correct  without 
austerity,  and  exemplary  without  ostentation ;  because  they  present  even  to 
common  observers  the  innocence  of  a  hermit,  and  the  simplicity  of  a  patriarch  ; 
and  because  a  philosophic  eye  will  at  once  discover  in  them  the  deep  fix«d 
root  of  virtuous  principle,  anJ  the  solid  trunk  of  virtuous  habit." — See  Appen- 
dix to  Magec  on  Ike  Atonement,  p.  477. 

Even  Dr.  Horsley  was  forced  to  confess  his  respect  for  the  talents  am'  worth 
of  his  great  antagonist.  After  expressing  the  little  regard  he  had  for  Dr. 
Priestley's  "  argument  on  a  particular  subject,"  he  goes  on  to  add  ;  "  This 
hinders  not,  but  that  I  may  entertain  the  respect,  which  I  profess  for  your 
learning  in  other  subjects  ;  for  your  abilities  in  all  subjects  in  which  you  arc 
loarnt'd  ;  and  a  cordial  esteem  and  affection  for  the  virtues  of  your  character, 


j.ET.  iii.J  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  63 

of  true  religion,  wliich  kindled  in  them  the  light  of 
piety  and  goodness,  and  to  the  illustration  and  diffu- 
sion of  which,  many  of  them  devoted  their  lives  at 
the  cost  of  the  greatest  sacrifices?  The  persons, 
whose  names  have  just  been  mentioned,  and  a  multi- 
tude of  others,  whose  names  have  not  been  mention- 
ed, were  remarkable  for  nothing  more  than  their 
purity  of  manners  and  morals.  It  is  not  pretended, 
that  there  are  no  exceptions  ;  but  I  am  confident  you 
cannot  select  an  equal  number  of  names  of  eminence 
from  any  sect,    whose  biographies  and  whose  works 

which  I  believe  to  be  great  and  amiable."  Horsleys  Letters  to  Priestley,  p. 
276.  Let.  XVII. 

The  following  remarks  on  the  character  of  Lindsey  are  from  a  Trinitarian, 
the  Rev.  Job  Orton,  who  has  been  called  the  "  last  of  the  Puritans."  They 
are  contained  in  his  Letters  to  Dissenting  Ministers. 

"  I  am  exceedingly  glad,"  says  he,  "  to  hear,  that  Mr.  Lindsey's  chapel 
was  so  well  filled,  especially  in  the  summer  season,  when  the  London  congre- 
gations are  generally  thin.  I  have  had  two  or  three  letters  from  that  worthy 
and  excellent  man,  whom  I  much  esteem,  and  hold  in  the  same  veneration  as 
I  should  have  done  one  of  the  ejected  and  silenced  Ministers  a  century  ago.  I 
have  nothing  to  do  with  his  particular  sentiments  ;  but  his  good  sense,  learn- 
ing, piety,  integrity,  and  desire  to  do  good,  demand  the  esteem  and  affection 
of  every  consistent  Christian,  especially  every  consistent  Dissenter. 

"  Were  I  to  publish  an  account  of  ejected  and  silenced  Ministers,  I  shoulii 
be  strongly  tempted  to  insert  Mr.  Lindsey  in  the  list,  which  he  mentions  with 
so  much  veneration.  He  certainly  deserves  as  much  respect  and  honour  as 
any  one  of  them,-  for  the  part  he  has  acted.  Perhaps  few  of  them  exceeded 
him  in  learning  or  Piety.  I  venerate  him  as  I  would  any  of  your  confessors. 
As  to  his  particular  sentiments,  they  are  nothing  to  me,  any  more  than  Bax- 
ter s,  or  Toinbes's,  or  John  Goodwin's.  An  honest,  pious  man,  who  makes 
such  a  sacrifice  to  truth  and  conscience,  as  he  has  done,  is  a  glorious  charac- 
ter, and  deserves  the  respect,  esteem,  and  veneration  of  every  true  christian, 
whatever  his  particular  sentiments  may  be." — See  Monthly  Repository,  Vol.  I. 
p.  304. 

Among  other  English  Unitarians,  not  mentioned  above,  whose  talents  and 
learning  have  never  been  disputed,  and  whose  moral  character  will  bear  any 
scrutiny,  which  the  eagle-eyed  malice  of  their  enemies  can  make,  may  be  num- 
bered the  following ;  namely,  Bishop  Clayton,  Abernethy,  Leland,  Lovvman. 


64  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [I'AUT  i. 

bear  such  uniform  and  unequivocal  testimony  to 
their  reverence  for  divine  truth,  their  amiable  and 
excellent  virtues,  their  christian  meekness,  charity, 
benevolence,  fortitude,  and  a  faithful  discharge  of 
their  social  and  relisfious  duties  in  every  walk  of  life. 
Nothing  can  be  more  diametrically  opposite  to  the 
entire  spirit  of  your  charges,  than  the  facts,  which 
may  be  collected,  by  recurring  to  the  lives  and  pro- 
fessions of  distinguished  Unitarians.  These  facts 
ought  to  be  known  and  respected,  before  the  liberty 
is  taken  to  cast  reproach  on  their  moral  character, 
and  their  religious  faith.  Is  it  to  be  believed,  that 
Watts  and  Whitby  became  bad  men,  when  they 
abandoned  their  trinitarian  sentiments  ?  Is  there  any 
evidence,  that  they  were  not  as  virtuous,  as  pipus,  and 
as  sincere  practical  christians,  as  they  had  always  pre- 
viously been?  Bishop  Horsley,  that  paragon  of 
meekness,  candour,  and  charity,  declared  "  the  moral 
good  of  Unitarians  to  be  sin."  If  this  indeed  be  so, 
if  it  be  really  a  duty  to  reprobate  their  virtues  as 
vices,  and  to  condemn  in  them  what  is  worthy  of 
the  highest  praise  in  others,  then  it  must  be  confes- 
sed, that  the  charges  against  them  of  irreligion,  licen- 
tiousness, and   immorality,  as  proceeding  from  their 


Willium  Petiii,  Palmer,  Tyrrwhit,  Disney,  Kenrick,  Simpson,  Toulmin,  Reyn- 
olds, Estlin,  Dr.  Enfield,  Bretland,  Turner.  To  these  may  be  added  from 
among  the  earlier  English  Unitarians,  Elvvall,  Biddle,  Firmin,  and  Hojnon 
Haynes,  the  friend  and  associate  of  Newton.  The  rare  virtues  of  Biddle  and 
Firmin  have  been  celebrated  by  all  parties.  Bishop  Burnet  bears  the  highest 
testimony  to  the  excellence  of  the  latter.  History  of  his  own  Times,  f'ol.  111. 
p.  292.  And  even  John  Pyp  Smith,  to  whom  the  viilues  of  other  Unitarians 
seem  not  to  be  virtues,  calls  Firmin  a  "  mirror  of  charity." — Lelttrt  to  Bd- 
sham,p.2ii. 


i-tr.  ill.j  CHARGES  AGAINST  UMTAKIAJSi?.  (J^ 

religious  opinions,  may  admit  of  a  plausible  defence, 
but  on  no  other  grounds. 

But,  after  all,  what  good  is  likely  to  be  done  by 
sucii  charges  ?  Is  it  not  better  to  do  something  for 
harmony,  christian  love,  and  mutual  kindness,  than  to 
apply  the  torch  and  kindle  the  flame  of  discord  ? 
Would  not  the  cause  of  piety  be  more  advanced  by 
otfering  arguments  to  convince  Unitarians  of  their 
errors,  or  persuasions  to  turn  them  from  their  sins, 
or  counsel  and  advice  to  diminish,  rather  than 
strengthen  the  prejudices  of  their  enemies,  to  allay, 
rather  than  inflame  the  passions?  Would  it  not 
indicate  more  of  the  christian  spirit  to  make  an  eflfort 
to  rescue  and  save  the  beings,  who  are  represented 
to  be  diving  into  the  depths  of  depravity  by  system, 
and  seeking  their  ruin  upon  principle,  than  it  would 
to  employ  such  force  as  could  be  commanded  to  in*- 
crease  their  velocity,  and  hasten  their  destruction? 

Your  sentence  of  condemnation  concerns  Unitarians 
not  merely  as  christians,  but  as  men,  as  members  of 
society.  It  regards  them  as  immoral  from  the  influ- 
ence of  their  religious  principles  ;  and  if  this  be  true, 
they  ought  to  be  shunned  by  all  good  persons,  as  dan- 
gerous to  the  peace  and  order  of  the  community. 
It  would  raise  against  them  the  inquisition  of  public 
opinion,  and  not  only  subject  them  to  the  prejudices 
of  party  zeal,  and  the  caprices  of  ignorant  credulity, 
but  it  would  banish  from  them  the  privileges  of  so- 
ciety, the  affections  of  friends,  the  charity  and  respect 
of  the  virtuous  and  the  well-informed.  Such  a  sen 
tonco  ?-equires  explanation.  It  is  due  to  truth,  jus- 
0 


66  CHARGES    AGAINST  UiNITARIANS.  fPART  i. 

tice,  and  good  faith  ;  and  especially  it  is  due  to  the 
persons  who  have  been  injured  by  this  censure, 
whether  intentionally  or  not,  it  is  due  to  them,  that 
some  testimony  should  be  advanced  in  its  support, 
and  some  reasons  assigned  for  so  violent  an  attack  on 
their  morals,  and  their  religious  character.  This  is 
what  they  have  a  right  to  expect  and  demand. 


LETTER  IV. 

Charges  against  the  Opinions  of  Unitarians. 


I  HAVE  perused  your  Reply  to  a  letter  lately  ad- 
dressed to  you,  respectins;  certain  charges  against  the 
moral  character  of  Unitarians,  contained  in  your  Or- 
dination Sermon.  This  Reply  is  of  a  nature,  which 
requires  a  continuation  of  my  remarks.  I  agree  en- 
tirely with  you,  that  the  cause  of  truth  and  righteous- 
ness will  not  suffer,  but  rather  be  promoted,  by  fair 
investigation  and  temperate  discussion.  Without 
these,  few  truths,  which  are  of  any  value,  can  be  ra- 
tionally and  permanently  established.  It  is  only  the 
Airnsy  texture  of  error,  that  will  crumble  and  decay 
at  the  touch.  \i  is  only  the  counterfeit  coin,  that 
will  be  tarnished  by  the  purifying  test.  And  so 
with  opinions;  what  is  false  may  be  detected  and  ex- 
posed  by    iiKjuiry    and    argument  ;  truth    will  stand 


i,ET.  IV.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  67 

more  firm,  assume  a  statelier  majesty,  and  shine  with 
a  brighter  lustre. 

For  these  reasons  I  do  not  regret,  that  you  have 
imposed  on  me  the  necessity  of  speaking  more  at 
large  on  the  subject  of  your  charges  against  Unitari- 
ans. I  should  consider  myself  guilty  of  a  culpable 
inditFerence  and  neglect,  not  to  defend,  when  occa- 
sion requires,  such  opinions,  and  especially  religious 
opinions,  as  I  have  adopted  from  a  conviction  of  their 
truth.  And  if,  in  addition  to  this,  I  should  not  be 
prompt  to  repel  unprovoked  and  unwarrantable  at- 
tacks on  my  moral  character,  I  should  feel,  that  I 
had  as  little  respect  for  myself,  as  love  of  virtue,  and 
regard  for  religion. 

You  complain  with  some  warmth  of  the  kind  of 
language  used  in  my  letter  ;  you  think  it  harsh  and 
disrespectful.  Of  this  I  am  not  aware.  Applied  to 
your  general  character,  it  possibly  might  be  so  ;  but 
it  was  not  thus  applied  ;  it  was  used  with  exclusive 
reference  to  your  Sermon.  The  writer  was  not  obli- 
ged to  know  any  thing  more  of  your  character,  while 
commenting  on  that  discourse,  than  he  found  there 
displayed  ;  and  if  he  did  know  more,  it  was  not  his 
duty  to  let  this  knowledge  betray  him  into  lan- 
guage, which  would  not  express  his  sentiments,  to 
the  exclusion  of  that,  which  he  was  conscious  the  na- 
ture of  the  subject  imperiously  demanded. 

Besides,  you  seem  to  forget  the  provocation.  Or 
have  you  seriously  persuaded  yourself,  that  there  is 
nothing  offensive  in  charging  men,  who  feel  that  they 
are  as  sincere,   as  conscientious,  as  virtuous,    and  as 


08  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIAiNb.  [paut  i. 

pious  as  yourself,  with  having  embraced  "dreadful 
and  soul  destroying  errors,"  and  "  destructive  here- 
sies ;"  and  itj  affirming,  that  they  "  cannot  be  regard- 
ed as  christians  m  any  correct  sense  of  the  word,  or 
as  any  more  in  the  way  of  salvation,  than  Mohamme- 
dans or  Jews  ;"  that  their  "  preachers  all  over  the 
world  are  most  acceptable  to  the  gay,  the  fashiona- 
ble, the  worldly  minded,  and  even  the  licentious;" 
that  "  they  are  not  in  the  smallest  perceptible  de- 
gree sanctified  by  their  system;"  and  that  among 
them,  you  "  look  in  vain  for  the  monuments  of  its  re- 
forming and  purifying  power  V  Do  you  suppose 
these  expressions  peculiarly  calculated  to  soften  the 
temper  of  those  against  whom  they  are  directed,  to 
draw  them  over  to  conciliation  and  mildnes.^,  or  to 
teach  them  to  search  for  soft  and  soothing  phrases  ? 
Would  any  one  be  thought  serious,  who  should  take 
such  a  course  under  circumstances  like  these  ? 

An  attack,  which  involved  the  opinions,  motives, 
conduct,  and  character  of  the  persons  on  whom  it 
was  made ;  which  aimed  a  destroying  blow  at  every 
thing  most  valuable  in  life,  and  most  consoling  in 
prospect ;  such  an  attack,  you  could  hardly  suppose 
would  be  gently  repelled.  His  sensibility  is  not  to  be 
envied,  who  could  feel  no  shock  from  it.  Every  man 
is  bound  to  defend  his  reputation;  on  this  depends 
the  dignity  of  his  character,  and  his  usefulness  in 
life  ;  when  this  is  gone,  nothing  worth  having  re- 
main«.  Had  your  attack  extended  to  Unitarians 
only  as  members  of  civil  society,  they  would  have 
no  ordinary  grounds  of  complaint.     As  it  is,  the  case 


LET.  IV.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  69 

is  more  aggravating  ;  you  come  down  particularly  on 
their  religious  character  ;  you  accuse  them  of  immo- 
rality in  consequence  of  spiritual  blindness  and  reli- 
gious errors;  the  principles  of  their  faith  you  repre- 
sent to  be  peculiarly  grateful  to  the  loose  and  irreli- 
gious; they  have  no  reforming  power;  their  efficacy 
is  not  seen  in  the  lives  of  those,  who  embrace  them. 
We  should  truly  not  deserve  the  privileges  of 
christians,  if  we  could  recognize  ourselves  in  the  pic- 
ture, which  you  have  drawn.  If  our  apathy  Avere 
so  great,  as  not  to  be  excited  by  this  exhibition,  we 
might  well  suspect  the  truth,  power,  and  nature  of 
our  religion.  But  even  you  allow  us  to  be  sincere. 
Would  you  allow  it  any  longer,  if  we  could  acquiesce 
in  the  justice  of  your  charges  ?  Can  we  be  sincere 
in  adopting  principles  of  moral  action,  and  of  piety, 
and  in  offering  a  service  to  our  Maker,  which  we 
know  to  be  offensive  in  his  sight  ?  Can  we  be  sincere, 
in  abetting  a  religion,  which  we  are  sure  is  working 
our  ruin  ?  This  is  not  possible,  If  we  are  sincere  in 
any  thing,  it  must  be  in  what  Ave  believe  to  be  the 
principles  of  a  pure  and  holy  religion,  the  truth  as  it 
is  in  Jesus,  and  in  holding  a  faith,  which  we  conceive 
will  be  the  surest  means  of  fixing  the  stamp  of  virtue 
and  holiness  on  our  characters,  and  of  preparing  us 
for  realizing  the  hopes  of  a  glorious  immortality.  To 
suppose  a  believer  in  Jesus  sincere  in  pursuing  the 
course,  which  you  have  ascribed  to  Unitarians,  is  ab- 
surd ;  and  if  we  are  sincere  in  what  we  believe  to  be 
the  true  faith,  and  the  great  duties  and  obligations  of 
the  christian  religion,  we  must  think. — every  princi- 


70  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  [pakt  i. 

pie  of  our  nature  compels  us  to  think, — that  the  mode 
in  which  you  have  attacked  us  is  singularly  unjust 
and  indefensible. 

In  your  Reply,  you  have  deserted  the  ground  first 
taken,  and  which  was  the  topic  of  discussion  in  my 
last  letter.  The  subject  in  its  original  shape,  as  we 
have  fully  seen,  related  to  the  moral  character  of 
Unitarians  ;  and  your  remarks  on  that  point  only,  were 
all,  which  you  were  desired  to  explain  and  substan- 
tiate. This  was  more  than  once  expressly  stated. 
You  were  called  on  to  give  "  some  reasons  for  your 
violent  attack  on  the  morals  and  religious  character'' 
of  Unitarians.  This  request  has  not  been  met,  nor 
the  subject  scarcely  touched. 

But  you  have  entered  on  a  broader  and  very  dif- 
ferent field,  by  turning  from  character  to  the  nature 
and  tendency  oj* opinions.  This  was  setting  aside  the 
main  purpose  of  inquiry.  It  was  desired  that  you 
would  point  to  some  example  ;  describe  the  state  of 
morals  among  Unitarians  where  they  are  united  in 
separate  bodies  ;  examine  their  institutions  ;  refer  to 
some  authentic  historical  record ;  to  the  general  sen- 
timent of  mankind  ;  or,  indeed,  bring  forward  any 
sort  of  testimony,  which  should  justify  you  in  making- 
charges  of  so  serious  an  aspect  against  a  Avhole  de- 
nomination of  cln-istians.  This  has  not  been  done, 
nor  attempted. 

As  to  the  tendency  oj'  opinions,  it  is  quite  another 
thmg  ;  it  is  to  be  settled  by  examination  of  principles 
and  by  argument,  and  may  be  decided  either  way 
without  impeachinj;-  any  one's  character.     But  actual 


LET,  IV.]  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  71 

effects  must  be  substantiated  by  positive  proof.  To 
charge  immorality,  is  to  assert  a  fact  ;  evidence  is 
demanded ;  immorality  consists  not  in  an  opinion,  but 
in  visible  acts,  which  may  be  cited.  This  you  have 
not  done  ;  you  have  referred  to  no  class  of  Unitari- 
tarians  more  wicked  as  a  class,  than  their  brethren 
of  other  denominations.  You  have  singled  them  out, 
as  prominent  on  the  list  of  evil  doers.  Make  it  ap- 
pear, by  adducing  facts,  and  they  will  be  satisfied. 
Until  you  do,  they  must  continue  to  think,  that  you 
have  accused  them  wrongfully,  and  injured  them 
without  a  cause. 

A  portion  of  your  Reply  is  occupied  in  endeavour- 
ing to  show  the  suitableness  of  the  occasion,  which 
you  embraced  for  delivering  the  sentiments  contained 
in  your  Sermon.  To  this  I  have  little  to  say.  It  is 
natural  however,  to  ask  what  good  effect  was  likely 
to  be  produced  by  such  unqualified  and  unauthenti- 
cated  censures  ?  The  religion  of  the  Saviour  is  a 
religion  of  peace,  brotherly  love,  good  Avill,  kindness, 
affection.  These  virtues  he  has  commanded  all  men 
to  practise,  and  made  it  the  great  characteristic  of 
his  true  followers,  that  they  love  one  another. 
Could  the  charges  in  your  Sermon  against  Unitarians 
produce  this  effect?  Would  your  hearers  or  read- 
ers be  more  ready  to  love  those  of  whom  so  revolt- 
ing a  picture  was  drawn,  and  who  Avere  denounced 
with  so  much  earnestness  ?  And  would  the  persons 
themselves,  who  were  portrayed  in  such  colours, 
have  their  tempers  improved,  their  good  feelings 
called  forth,    and  the  holy  charities  of  their  natur^^ 


72  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS,  [part  i. 

multiplied  and  strengthened,  by  listening  to  the  lan- 
guage in  which  they  were  described?  When  all  the 
rules  of  moral  perception,  and  all  the  laws  of  virtue, 
and  all  the  principles  of  human  nature,  are  inverted, 
you  may  expect  such  a  result,  and  not  before.  Such 
descriptions  might  move  the  uninformed  and  the 
prejudiced,  to  shun,  reproach,  and  hate  Unitarians, 
but  they  could  never  excite  an  emotion  of  christian 
love. 

There  is  another  thing,  also,  which  must  have  some 
weight  on  every  fair  mind.  The  Unitarians  of  the 
city  where  your  Sermon  was  preached,  had  recently 
associated  themselves  into  a  regularly  organized 
body  for  the  purpose  of  worshipping  God  in  such  a 
way,  as  their  consciences  should  dictate,  their  under- 
standing direct,  and  as  they  should  believe  the  Scrip- 
tures to  teach.  In  doing  this,  they  conformed  to  the 
laws  of  their  country,  as  well  as  to  the  laws  of  reli- 
gion. They  asked  no  favours,  they  claimed  no  privi- 
leges, which  others  did  not  enjoy.  They  set  up  no 
pretensions,  which  they  did  not  cheerfully  allow  to 
others;  they  asked  no  more,  than  to  be  left  in  quiet 
possession  of  the  Bible,  to  be  unmolested  in  searching 
for  the  tiTiths,  which  it  contains,  in  conforming  to  the 

> instructions  of  the  Saviour,  and  in  seeking  the  salva- 
tion of  their  souls,  by  obeying  his  laws,  and  striving 
to  render  an  acceptable  service  to  their  Maker. 
Notwithstanding  this,  it  is  well  known,  that  public 
sentiment  has  been  unreasonably  excited  against  them. 
Their  enemies  have  been  busy  to  misrepresent,  the 

-credulous  have  been  ready  to  believe,  the  timid  to 
sliudder  with  alarms,  the  ignorant  to  denounce,   and 


a.ET.  iv.l  CHARGES   AGAINST   UNITARIANS.  73 

all  have  been  inclined  to  look  on  Unitarians  with  an 
eye  of  distrust  and  aversion.  Under  such  circumstan- 
ces, and  conscious  of  the  purity  of  their  motives, 
and  of  their  responsibility  to  God,  they  could  hardly 
deem  it  a  mark  of  christian  kindness  in  any  one  to 
hold  them  up  as  worthy  of  public  censure,  dangerous 
to  society,  unsound  in  faith,  and  immoral  in  their  con- 
duct. 

But  you  say,  "  alloAV  me  to  ask,  are  Unitarians  in 
the  habit  of  being  very  scrupulous  about  bringing 
forward  their  peculiar  opinions  on  public  and  special 
occasions,  and  even  in  preaching  ordination  sermons  ?'' 
This  question,  it  is  presumed,  every  Unitarian  will 
joyfully  answer  in  the  negative.  The  time  will  never 
come,  it  is  hoped,  when  Unitarians  will  be  "  scrupu- 
lous about  bringing  forward  their  peculiar  opinions" 
in  any  place.  And  what  is  this  to  the  purpose  ?  No 
one  has  complained,  that  you  should  enforce  your 
peculiar  opinions  in  such  a  place  and  manner  as  you 
choose.  That  charges  were  made  against  the  char- 
acter of  others  was  the  complaint,  and  not  that  you 
attacked  their  opinions  or  published  your  own.  On 
what  occasion  has  a  Unitarian  preacher  done  this? 
Never.  Look  over  their  printed  discourses,  consult 
as  many  persons,  as  you  will,  who  have  heard  such 
as  have  not  been  printed,  and  then  show  me  a  single 
example  in  which  the  Presbyterians,  Episcopalians, 
Catholics,  or  any  other  sect,  have  been  selected  and 
denounced,  as  peculiarly  immoral  from  the  nature  of 
their  religious  faith,  or  from  any  other  cause ;  show 

me  but  one    example,   and  J   will  give  up  the  argu- 
10 


74  CHARGES  AGAINST  L'MTARIAJVS.  [part  i- 

ment.  You  can  find  none.  But  suppose  you  could  ; 
suppose  it  were  true,  that  Presbyterians,  or  any  other 
body  of  ciiristians,  have  been  denounced  and  accused 
of  immoraUty  by  Unitarian  preachers,  it  would  not 
readily  appear,  how  such  an  outrage  could  justify 
any  one  in  following  their  steps. 

It  is  time,  however  to  dismiss  this  part  of  the  sub- 
ject, and  to  come  more  directly  to  the  points,  which 
remain  for  discussion.  In  removing  your  charges 
from  the  moral  character  of  Unitarians,  and  fixing 
them  on  the  tendency  of  their  principles  and  opinions, 
you  have  rendered  them  much  more  indefinite,  and 
connected  with  them  many  additional  topics.  Seve- 
ral of  the  particulars,  incorporated  with  your  re- 
marks on  the  evil  tendency  of  Unitarian  sentiments, 
it  will  be  necessary  to  examine  with  considerable 
attention  ;  such,  for  instance,  as  your  statements 
concerning  the  christian  name,  the  nature  and  objects 
of  christian  charity,  and  the  opinions  and  characters 
of  some  of  the  most  distinguished  English  Unitarians. 
The  extraordinary  errors,  into  which  1  think  you 
have  fallen  in  treating  of  these  topics,  seem  to  serve 
as  a  kind  of  support  in  your  mind  of  other  errors 
more  important,  and  not  less  extraordinary,  respect- 
ing the  principles  and  tendency  of  Unitarian  doc- 
trines. To  correct  the  former,  Avill  aid  in  some  de- 
gree to  remove  the  latter. 

You  charge  Unitarians  with  denying  all  the  essen- 
tial doctrines  of  the  christian  religion,  and  with  em- 
bracing in  their  room  sentiments,  whose  influence 
drives  them  naturally  into  irreligion  and  immorality. 


Y,ET.  iv.J  CHARGES  AGAINST  UNITARIANS.  75 

Some  of  these  sentiments,  which  are  deemed  most 
offensive  and  objectionable,  you  particularize.  Such 
will  be  distinctly  examined.  In  considering  this 
charge  in  its  proper  latitude  and  various  bearings, 
and  in  testing  the  accuracy  of  your  views  and  state- 
ments, I  shall  pursue  the  following  method. 

I.  Inquire  into  the  import  of  the  christian  name  ; 
pointing  out  the  evils  of  confining  it  to  particular  sects, 
and  examining  on  what  authority  any  person  assumes 
the  right  of  denying  it  to  those,  who  believe  in  the 
Gospel,  and  in  the  divine  mission  of  Christ.  Inquire, 
also,  into  the  nature  of  charity  as  explained  in  the 
Scriptures,  and  practised  by  the  first  christians,  show- 
ing the  weak  and  unscriptural  pretence  on  which 
some  of  the  orthodox  Avould  limit  its  operation  to  the 
few  of  a  favourite  party. 

II.  Consider  the  doctrine  of  the  trinity,  its  origin, 
meaning,  and  authority,  and  especially  its  moral  ten- 
dency. Also,  the  doctrine  of  atonement,  as  under- 
stood by  different  christians,  and  the  comparative  in- 
fluence of  Unitarian  and  orthodox  views  in  relation 
to  the  character  of  God,  the  pious  affections,  and  the 
practical  virtues. 

III.  A  general  comparison  between  the  doctrines 
of  Unitarianism  and  Calvinism  in  regard  to  their 
moral  tendency ;  embracing  the  views  entertained 
by  each  party  of  the  depravity  of  man  ;  of  conver- 
sion and  divine  influence  ;  of  election,  particular  re- 
demption, and  perseverance  ;  the  doctrines  of  future 
punishment  and  annihilation;  and  the  tendency  of 
Calvinism  to  suppress   free  inquiry,  discourage  the 


76  CHARGES  AGAINST  UMTARIATCS.  [part  i. 

Study  of  the   Scriptures,   and  retard  the  progress   of 
reh2;ious  knowledge. 

IV.  An  inquiry  into  the  sentiments  of  celebrated 
Enojhsh  Unitarians,  Avith  proofs,  that  any  charges 
against  their  rehgious  opinions,  as  having  an  immoral 
tendency  on  their  lives  and  conduct,  are  groundless 
and  unjust ;  and  that  there  is  the  strongest  evidence 
of  their  honesty,  sincerity,  veracity,  independence, 
christian  temper,  and  christian  practice. 

A  full  and  mature  consideration  of  these  several 
topics  will  prepare  us  for  the  conclusion,  that  Calvin- 
istic  orthodoxy  lias  no  claims  to  the  high  pre-emi- 
nence to  which  you  would  raise  it,  either  as  a  ra- 
tional and  consistent  system  of  faith,  a  guardian  of 
morals,  or  a  promoter  of  piety.  It  will,  moreover, 
enable  every  impartial  inquirer  to  divest  Unitarian- 
ism  of  the  ill  shapen,  frightful  garb,  in  which  your 
fancy  has  clothed  it,  and  to  behold  under  that  hide- 
ous covering  the  fair  proportions,  majestic  nature 
and  commanding  aspect,  of  a  pure  christian  faith, 
where  reason,  and  truth,  and  scripture,  and  charity 
combine  to  add  dignity  and  grace.  The  conclusion 
it  is  hoped  will  also  be  very  obvious,  that  there  may 
be  pious  and  good  christians  under  both  forms  of 
faith  J  that  it  is  quite  as  important  for  believers  to 
love  God  and  their  brethren,  as  to  have  an  orthodox 
creed  ;  and  that  the  rewards  of  salvation  depend  on 
the  deeds  done  in  the  body,  and  the  virtues  that 
dwell  in  the  heart,  more  than  on  the  ever  varying 
opinions  that  float  in  the  mind,  or  the  dreams  that 
play  in  the  fancy. 


P^RT  IL 


CHRISTIAN   NAME  AND  CHARITY. 


LETTER  I. 


Import  of  the  Christian  JVame,  and  the  Evils  of  confin- 
ing it  to  particular  Sects. 

SIR, 

-In  the  present  letter  I  am  to  inquire  into  the  grounds, 
on  which  you  deny  to  Unitarians  the  name  of  Chris- 
tians. At  first  view,  this  subject  does  not  seem  to  be 
of  much  importance.  Names  do  not  aher  things, 
and  whatever  any  one  may  choose  to  call  us,  we  shall 
still  be  the  same.  But  many  things  derive  their  im- 
portance as  much  from  their  consequences,  as  their 
nature.  Although  names  are  nothing  in  themselves, 
yet  when  they  misrepresent  our  motives,  sentiments, 
and  characters,  they  are  not  so  trifling,  or  unworthy 
of  consideration,  as  might  at  first  be  imagined. 

Our  reputation  in  the  world  depends  on  the  opin- 
ion of  others.     If  this  opinion  be   perverted,  or  ill 


78  CIIRISTUN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  [part  n. 

founded,  it  will  not  alter  our  characters,  but  it  will 
Aveaken  our  influence,  destroy  our  usefulness,  and 
thus  diminish  our  happiness.  Now  this  result  is  to 
us  a  real  injury,  and  the  more  to  be  deprecated,  as 
coming  from  so  unjustifiable  a  source,  as  false  opinion. 
And  besides,  although  K;e  are  not  made  worse,  others 
are,  because  they  are  prompted  to  indulge  thoughts, 
give  currency  to  reports,  and  be  guilty  of  conduct, 
which  adds  nothing  to  their  own  virtues,  nor  to  the 
good  order  of  society.  It  is  obvious,  then,  that  there 
is  some  virtue  in  names,  and  that  it  is  the  duty  of 
every  man,  who  values  his  reputation  and  his  rights, 
to  assert  his  claims  to  such  titles,  as  shall  truly  repre- 
sent his  character. 

No  name  is  more  honourable,  none  is  more,  endear- 
ing to  every  sincere  follower  of  Christ,  none  is  cher- 
ished by  him  with  more  sacredness,  than  the  name 
of  Christian.  It  is  a  bond  of  union  and  love,  which 
unites  the  hearts  of  those,  who  are  enlightened  by 
the  same  truths,  engaged  in  the  same  duties,  encour- 
aged by  the  same  promises,  and  pressing  forward 
with  the  same  hopes.  This  bond  you  have  attempt- 
ed to  sever.  A  large  portion  of  the  followers  of 
Jesus,  who  humbly  and  earnestly  study  his  Gospel, 
who  rely  implicitly  on  his  word,  who  desire  to  bring 
themselves  wholly  in  subjection  to  hie  laws,  who  con- 
sider him  to  have  been  commissioned  from  heaven  to 
make  known  the  will  of  God  and  the  terms  of  salva- 
tion to  men,  and  whose  choicest  consolations  are  de- 
rived from  their  faith  in  the  divinity  of  his  character, 
and  the  truth   of  his  doctrines, — a  large    portion  of 


l,ET.  I.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  79 

these,  you  would  exclude  from  the  privilege  of  unit- 
ing under  his  name,  and  deprive  them  of  the  conso- 
lations, blessings,  and  enjoyments,  which  such  a  union 
is  calculated  to  ensure.  Few  christians,  who  feel 
the  power  of  the  religion  they  profess,  and  are  sensi- 
ble of  their  own  imperfections  and  proneness  to 
error,  would  be  willing  to  pronounce  such  a  sentence 
of  exclusion.  Few  would  presume  to  institute  such  a 
tribunal  upon  the  consciences  and  hearts  of  their 
fellow  men,  and  place  themselves  in  the  judgment 
seat  of  Him,  before  whom  all  "  must  stand  or  fall," 
and  who  alone  has  power  to  judge. 

It  is  not  my  purpose  here  to  inquire  into  the  origin 
of  the  name  christian.  It  was  first  applied  to  the 
disciples  of  Christ  at  Antioch  ;  but  whether  it  was 
originally  adopted  by  themselves,  or  given  by  others, 
we  are  not  told  ;  nor  is  it  of  any  moment.  The  pre- 
sent application  of  the  term  is  the  only  thing  Avith 
which  we  are  concerned. 

In  its  general  use  it  has  two  significations  ;  one  re- 
lating to  the  Jaith,  the  other  to  the  practice,  of  those 
to  whom  it  is  applied.  You  say  that  Unitarians  can- 
not be  "  regarded  as  christians  in  any  correct  sense 
of  the  word."  The  two  senses  here  mentioned,  it  is 
believed,  are  the  only  ones  in  Avhich  the  word  can 
with  any  propriety  be  used.  The  latter  of  these, 
indeed,  is  acquired  and  forced,  and  is  comparatively  of 
modern  origin.  It  is  sanctioned,  however,  by  custom. 
In  its  correct  use,  the  word  is  employed  exclusively 
to  designate  those,  who  believe  in  Christ  as  the  Messi- 
ah, and  Avho  profess  to  receive  him  as  their  Master 


yO  CHRlSTlAiN  WAME  AND  CHARITY.  [part  ii. 

and  Saviour.  Why  are  you  entitled  to  the  name  of 
Calvinist,  or  any  other  person  to  the  patronymic  of 
the  leader,  whom  he  professes  to  follow  ?  Is  it  not 
from  this  circumstance  only,  because  you  profess  to 
receive  him  as  a  leader?  And  so  it  is  with  the  name 
of  christian.  All,  who  look  up  to  Christ  as  their 
head,  and  acknowledge  themselves  believers  in  him, 
and  subjects  of  his  kingdom,  are  entitled  to  the  chris- 
tian name. 

The  question  is  therefore  to  be  settled,  whether 
Unitarians  are  among  this  number?  You  say  they 
are  not,  and  explain  yourself  in  a  sort  of  abridgment 
of  the  second,  eighth,  and  tenth  Letters  of  Andrew 
Fuller.  But  neither  his  statements,  nor  yours  after 
him,  have  any  weight  on  my  mind.  They  are  mere 
assertions,  where  nothing  but  plain  facts,  and  manly 
argument,  could  be  of  any  value.  You  cannot  be  ig- 
norant, that  in  the  sincerity  of  our  hearts  we  believe 
in  the  truth  and  divine  character  of  the  religion  of 
Jesus,  as  firmly  as  you,  or  any  of  your  brethren ;  that 
we  consider,  and  have  infinite  joy  in  believing,  his 
religion  to  be  a  revelation  from  God;  that  Ave  be- 
lieve him  to  have  performed  mu-aclesby  divine  pow- 
er ;  that  we  receive  as  sacred  and  true  every  word 
he  spoke ;  that  his  commands  carry  with  them  in 
our  view  the  same  authority,  as  the  commands  of 
God;  that  our  hope  of  immortality  rests  wholly  on 
♦  he  veracity  of  his  word,  and  a  belief  in  his  resurrec- 
tion ;  that  we  look  for  salvation  only  on  the  condi- 
tions he  has  made  known;  and  that  we  believe  faith, 
repentance,   and  holiness  essential  to  all,  who  would 


LET.  I.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  81 

be  his  true  followers,  and  be  partakers  of  the  rewards 
he  has  promised.  With  this  knowledge  of  our  sen- 
timents, the  question  may  well  be  asked,  by  what 
authority  you  have  denied  to  us  the  name  of  chris- 
tian ?  If  those  who  have  this  faith,  and  cherish 
these  feelings,  and  hold  fast  these  hopes,  are  not  to 
be  called  Christians,  tell  us  what  they  are  to  be 
called.* 

In  regard  to  the  second,  or  popular  sense  of  the 
term,  I  shall  not  say  much  in  this  place,  because  it 
comes  under  topics,  which  will  be  particularly  dis- 
cussed hereafter.  Good  men,  who  are  zealous  in  ac- 
quiring a  knowledge  of  the  doctrines  and  duties  of 
the  christian  religion,  and  in  conforming  to  the  pre- 
cepts of  Christ,  are  called  Christians.  And  are  there 
no  such  among  Unitarians?  The  person,  who  strives 
to  obey  the  laws  of  the  Gospel,  who  is  habitual  in 
the  exercises  of  piety  and  devotion,  loves  and  aids 
his  neighbour,  subdues  his  passions,  resists  temptation, 
proscribes  hurtful  pleasures,  hates  vice,  condemns 
and  shuns  the  ways  of  the  wicked,  bears  up  with  for- 
titude in  adversity,  submits  cheerfully  to  the  will 
of  God,  is  penitent  for  his  past  sins,  relies  on  the 
promises  of  Christ,  endeavours  to  imbibe  his  spirit, 
and  walk  in  his  steps, — every  such  person  is  cordially 


*  Hartley  has  given  a  very  concise,  and  in  my  view,  a  very  correct  defini- 
tion of  tire  term  Christian.  "  To  believe  the  christian  religion,  is  to  believe 
that  Moses  and  the  prophets,  Christ  and  his  Apostles,  were  endued  with  divine 
authority,  that  they  had  a  commission  from  God  to  act  and  teach  as  they  did, 
and  that  he  will  verify  their  declarations  concerning  future  things,  and  espe- 
cially those  concerning  a  future  life,  by  the  event;  or,  in  other  words,  it  is 
to  receive  the  Scriptures  as  our  rule  of  life,  and  the  foundation  of  all  our  hopes 
and  fears-."     Hartley's  Works,  Vol.  II.  p.  71. 

n 


82  CHRlSTIAx\  AAME  AND  CHARITY.  [part  ii. 

acknowledged  bj  all  men,  not  only  to  deserve  the 
name,  but  to  sustain  the  character  of  a  christian. 
And  when  this  character  is  seen,  no  one  thinks  of  ask- 
ing what  his  religious  creed  is,  before  he  gives  him 
the  name.  Now  I  humbly  trust,  that  there  are  as 
many  persons  of  this  description  among  Unitarians,  as 
among  other  denominations.  In  respect  to  the  second 
sense  of  the  term,  therefore,  as  well  as  the  first, 
your  harsh  and  ungracious  sentence  of  exclusion  is 
passed  without  a  semblance  of  justice.* 

Let  us  look  for  a  moment  at  the  process,  by  which 
you  have  come  to  your  extraordinary  results.  You 
say,  "  he,  who  does  not  receive  the  doctrine  of  man's 
guilt  and  depravity  by  nature,  and  the  doctrine  of 
the  divinity  and    atonement  of   the  Son  of  God,  and 

*  I  cannot  forbear  to  quote  here  an  excellent  passage  from  President  Davies' 
Sermon  on  the  Christ ianjyame.  It  breathes  a  spirit  of  liberal  feeling  and  en- 
lightened charity,  which  may  be  recommended  with  some  hope  of  profit  to  all 
such,  as  think  themselves  alone  worthy  of  the  name  of  christian.  "  To  be  a 
christian,"  says  he,  "  is  not  enough  now-a-days,  but  a  man  must  also  be 
something  more  and  better  ;  that  is,  he  must  be  a  strenuous  bigot  to  this  or  that 
particular  church.  But  where  is  the  reason  or  propriety  of  this?  I  may  in- 
deed believe  the  same  things,  which  Luther  or  Calvin  believed  ;  but  I  do  not 
believe  them  on  the  authoiity  of  Luther  or  Calvin,  but  upon  the  sole  authority 
of  Jesus  Christ,  and  therefore  I  should  not  call  myself  by  their  name,  as  one  of  ' 
their  disciples,  but  by  the  name  of  Christ,  whom  alone  I  acknowledge  as  the 
author  of  my  religion,  and  my  only  Master  and  Lord.  If  I  learn  my  religion 
from  one  of  these  great  men,  it  is  indeed  proper  I  should  assume  their  name. 
If  I  learn  it  from  a  parliament  or  convocation,  and  make  their  acts  and  canons 
the  rule  and  ground  of  my  faith,  then  it  is  enough  for  me  to  be  of  the  establish- 
ed religion,  be  that  what  it  will.  I  may  witli  propriety  be  called  a  mere  confor- 
mist ;  tliat  is  my  highest  character ;  but  I  cannot  properly  be  called  a  Christian^ 
fur  a  Cliristian  learns  his  religion  not  from  acts  of  parliament,  or  from  the 
determination  of  councils,  but  from  Jesus  Christ  and  his  Gospel."  p.  229. 

The  pious  and  persecuted  Baxter  long  ago  expressed  similar  sentiments  in 
fewer  words,  when  he  said,  "I  am  a  christian,  a  mere  christian;  of  no  other 
religion  ;  my  churcli  is  the  Christian  Church." 


LET.  I.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  83 

of  the  sanctifying  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  does  not 
receive  the  Gospel,  and  is,  consequently,  no  Chris- 
tian." And  just  before,  you  pronounce  these  doctrines 
to  be  "  the  essence  of  Christianity."  And  again  you 
add,  "  it  follows  with  irresistible  force  of  evidence, 
to  ray  mind,  that  he  who  rejects  those  fundamental 
truths,  however  respectable,  virtuous,  and  apparently 
devout  he  may  be,  rejects  Christianity  as  really, 
though  not  under  precisely  the  same  circumsiances, 
yet  as  really  as  any  Deist  ever  did  ;  and  that  he  can- 
not, with  propriety,  be  called  a  Christian  in  aiiy 
sensed  Here  then  we  have  the  substance  of  your 
charges,  and  the  amount  of  your  argument ;  if  argu- 
ment, indeed,  it  can  be  called. 

You  have  defined  Christianity  in  your  own  way ; 
jou  have  made  its  essence  to  consist  in  doctrines  of 
your  own  choosing,  and  then  declared,  that  whoever 
does  not  receive  this  definition,  and  believe  the  doc- 
trines here  selected,  is  "  no  christian."  But  what 
is  this  to  the  purpose  ?  Your  convictions  may  be 
very  good  in  your  own  estimation,  and  may  have  a 
preponderating  influence  on  your  own  mind.  I  am 
willing  to  allow  this,  and  yet  maintain,  that  it  gives 
no  authority  to  pronounce  so  solemn  and  unqualified 
a  denunciation  against  a  large  class  of  persons,  who 
are  as  sincere  in  their  faith,  and  value  it  as  dearly  as 
you,  or  any  other  christian. 

What  did  our  Saviour  mean,  when  he  left  to  his 
followers  the  command,  "Judge  not,  that  ye  be  not 
judged  ;"  and  the  Apostle,  when  he  asked,  "  Who 
art  thou  that  judgest  another?"     Did  they   mean. 


84  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  [part  ii. 

that  we  should  solemnly  charge  our  brethren,  who 
cannot  think  as  we  do,  with  "  rejecting  Christianity 
as  really  as  any  Deist,"  or  with  being  unworthy  to 
"be  called  Christians  in  any  sense  ?"  Did  they  not 
rather  mean,  that  our  imperfections  should  teach  us 
to  distrust  ourselves,  and  that  the  daily  evidences, 
which  we  have  of  our  own  mistakes,  errors,  and 
faults,  should  make  us  cautious  how  we  assume  the 
office  of  censor,  in  rashly  condemning  the  opinions 
and  motives  of  otliers  ?  Such  is  the  letter  and  spirit 
of  the  Gospel.  Let  others  decide  liow  widely  it 
ditfers  from  the  letter  and  spirit  of  charges  like  the 
above.* 

You  call  total  depravity,  and  the  other  doctrines^ 
which  you  enumerate,  "  the  essence  of  Christianity, 
the  very  life  and  glory  of  the  system."  And  yet,  m 
this  enumeration  is  not  embraced  a  belief  in  the  exis- 
tence, attributes,  and  superintending  providence  of 
God,  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ,  the 
truth  and  divine  authority  of  his  word,  the  necessity 
of  faith,   repentance,   and  a  holy    life,   nor  a   future 

*  Bisliop  Watson  gives  exroUent  advice  on  this  subject  of  deciding  for  others 
what  they  sli:ill  receive  as  tiie  essence  of  Christianity.  "  When  we  speak 
concerning  the  truth  of  revealed  religion,"  he  observes,  "  we  include  not  only 
the  certainty  of  the  divine  missions  of  Moses  and  of  Jesus,  but  the  nature  of  the 
several  doctrines  pioniulgated  by  liu'm  to  mankind.  Now  you  may  ask  me 
what  these  doctriiios  are  ?  I  know  what  they  are  to  me  ;  but,  pretending  to  nO 
degree  of  infallibility,  I  think  it  safer  to  tell  you  where  they  are  contained, 
than  whatthcy  arc.  They  are  contained  in  the  Bible  ;  and  if,  in  the  reading 
of  that  Book,  your  sentiments  concerning  the  doctrines  of  Christianity  should 
be  different  from  those  of  your  neighbour,  or  from  those  of  the  church,  be  per- 
ijuafled  on  your  part,  that  infallibility  appertains  as  little  to  you,  as  it  does  to 
tlie  church  ofwliirh  you  arc  a  member,  or  to  any  imlividual,  who  differs  from 
<roii  "     Cknrge  delivered  to  Ihr  Clergy  in  the  Diocese  o/LandaJf,  June,  1795, 


1.KT.  i.j  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  85 

state  of  just  retribution.  Now  supposing  the  doc- 
trines which  you  bring  together,  are  true ;  how  is  it 
possible  for  them  to  comprise  the  essence  oi  the  chris- 
tian rehgion,  without  these  fundamental  articles  ? 
Take  these  away,  and  what  will  remain?  Surely 
nothing.  Your  essence  itself  depends  on  the  truth  of 
these.  But  every  doctrine,  which  you  have  combin- 
ed to  form  this  essence,  might  be  blown  to  the  winds, 
and  still  these  great  principles  of  christian  faith, 
piety,  righteousness,  and  hope,  would  remain  the 
same,  impose  the  same  obligations  to  obedience  and 
right  practice,  open  the  same  vivid  prospects  of  fu- 
ture glory  to  the  righteous,  and  of  future  suffering 
and  despair  to  the  wicked. 

Such  are  the  nature  and  grounds  of  your  severe 
judgment,  respecting  the  faith  and  claims  of  Unita- 
rians. Let  us  trace  this  rule  of  judging  to  some  of  its 
applications.  It  as  effectually  deprives  all  other  de- 
nominations, except  Presbyterians,  of  the  faith  and 
name  of  christians,  as  it  does  Unitarians.  If  you  are 
consistent,  and  adhere  to  your  rule,  you  can  never 
give  the  title  of  christians  to  Hopkinsians,  Arminians, 
Catholics,  Baptists,  Methodists,  nor  indeed  to  any 
sect,  which  dilfers  from  the  one,  whose  creed  you 
embrace.  For  the  whole  amount  of  all  you  have 
said  on  the  subject,  proves  Unitarians  not  to  be 
Christians  for  this  one  reason,  and  this  alone,  name- 
ly, that  they  deviate  from  your  standard.  Others 
may  come  nearer  the  mark,  and  then  they  will  be 
nearer  to  being  christians,  but  will  not  be  entirely 
such,   and  consequently    cannot   be  called  such,   till 


86  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  [part  u. 

they  look  at  all  things  from  the  same  position  as 
yourself,  and  see  them  in  the  same  shape,  colour* 
and  dimensions.  "It  is  a  censorious  and  perverse 
fancy,"  says  Watts,  "  to  pronounce  a  man  no  chris- 
tian, because  every  thought  of  his  soul,  and  all  the 
atoms  of  his  brain,  are  not  ranged  in  the  same  pos- 
ture with  mine."* 

Now,  I  beg  you  will  reflect  for  a  moment,  and  re- 
flect seriously,  on  the  deplorable  consequences  to 
which  this  will  lead.  It  is  true,  you  have  declared, 
"  that  you  give  to  Unitarians  what  you  are  willing  to 
receive  from  them."  That  is,  as  you  call  them  no 
christians,  you  are  willing  they  should  call  you  the 
same.  This  is  certainly  fair.  It  is  quite  obvious, 
that  we  have  just  as  much  right  as  any  others  to  se- 
lect a  set  of  doctrines,  and  declare  tliat  they  consti- 
tute the  essence  of  Christianity ;  and  we,  and  all 
christians,  have  an  equal  right  to  call  others  hard 
names  for  not  receiving,  Avhat  we  decide  to  be  these 
essential  doctrines. 

But  look  at  the  consequences.  The  Catholics  may 
call  you  no  christian  for  not  believing  in  the  Seven 
Sacraments,  for  rejecting  the  doctrine  of  the  real 
presence,  denying  the  virtue  of  extreme  unction,  the 
use  of  the  cross  in  ba])tism,  the  apostolical  vicarship  of 
the  Pope,  and  for  many  other  things,  in  which  they 
think  you  have  wofully  departed  from  the  true  faith, 
and  for  which  you  are  justly  to  be  ranked  among 
heretics.  The  Hopkinsians  may  call  you  no  chris- 
tian for  what  they  consider  your  fundamental  errors, 

■'  Causes  of  Uncliniitiibleiicss,  f  I. 


i,ET.  I.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  87 

respecting  the  origin  and  nature  of  sin,  the  nature  of 
holiness,  the  consequences  of  Adam's  transgression, 
the  extent  of  the  atonement,  the  influence  of  the 
Holj  Spirit,  and  the  ground  of  justification.  The 
Arminians  may  do  the  same  for  what  thej  think 
your  unscriptural  and  irrational  doctrines  of  absolute 
decrees,  total  depravity,  and  imputed  sin.  The  Bap- 
tists may  take  from  you  the  name  of  christian,  be- 
cause, in  their  view,  you  hold  to  a  dangerous  error 
respecting  one  of  the  sealing  ordinances  of  the  chris- 
tian religion,  and  have  never  been  properly  initiated 
into  the  visible  church  of  Christ.  Nay,  more,  each 
and  every  one  of  these  different  sects,  and  of  all  the 
sects  in  Christendom,  may  insist,  that  all  the  others 
have  no  right  or  title  to  the  christian  name,  and  are 
to  be  regarded  as  maintaining  such  "  dreadful,"  and 
"soul-destroying  errors,"  that  they  ought  to  be  ex- 
cluded from  all  communion  and  fellowship  with  true 
christians. 

Such  is  the  practical  result  of  the  principle  by 
which  you  profess  to  be  guided.  All  sects  think 
their  doctrines  as  important  and  necessary,  as  you 
think  yours ;  and  just  as  much  as  you  dilfer  from 
them,  they  believe  you  to  have  wandered  from  the 
true  christian  faith.  Suppose  them  all  to  take  the 
liberty,  which  you  have  done,  and  fall  to  writing  and 
preaching  against  the  propriety  of  calling  one  anoth- 
er christians.  Is  it  possible  that  any  good  purpose 
can  be  answered  by  such  a  course  ?  Would  it 
strengthen  peace,  harmony,  love,  and  social  order 
among  men?     Would  it  be  in  accordance  with   the 


3J5  CHRTSTIAN  NAME  AND  CflARlTY.  [part  ir. 

heavenly  precepts  of  the  Gospel,  and  the  holy  ex- 
ample of  the  Saviour?  In  these  childish  freaks  of 
calling  names,  and  in  denying  to  others  the  appella- 
tion of  Christians,  which  they  claim  and  value,  is 
there  much  of  the  meekness  of  wisdom,  much  of  the 
ma'^nanimity  of  a  generous  mind,  much  of  the  can- 
dour, forbearance,  and  brotherly  kindness,  which  are 
at  the  very  foundation  of  all  rational  piety,  and  social 
relio-ious  duty?  Would  they  help  to  kindle  a  ray  of 
goodness  in  the  heart,  or  call  forth  a  particle  of  love 
to  God,  or  love  to  man  ?  So  far  from  it,  that  a 
means  could  not  be  devised,  by  which  the  seeds  of 
discord  would  be  scattered  more  profusely,  or  be 
made  to  spring  up  with  more  riotous  luxuriance. 

Your  rule  will,  also,  exclude  from  the  pale  of  the 
church,  many  of  the  ablest  advocates  of  the  chris- 
tian scheme.  Will  you  deny  the  name  of  christians 
to  men,  who  have  employed  the  best  part  of  their 
lives,  and  all  their  talents  and  learning,  in  proving 
the  truth  of  the  christian  religion,  defending  it  against 
the  cavils  of  infidelity,  and  endeavouring  to  establish 
its  principles  in  the  minds  and  hearts  of  all  ?  This 
would  be  equally  a  glaring  solecism  in  language,  and 
an  act  of  injustice  to  the  memory  of  the  great  and 
good.     It  is,  nevertheless,  what  this  rule  demands. 

It  is  a  truth  well  worthy  of  observation,  and  one 
on  which  we  may  be  permitted  to  dwell  in  the  pre- 
sent connexion,  that  many  of  the  ablest  and  most 
distinguished  advocates  of  Christianity  have  been 
Unitarians.  And  it  is  a  fact  equally  notorious,  that  a 
larger  number  of  them,  than  of  any  other  single  de- 


i,ET.  I.J  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  09 

nomination,  have  written  expressly  on  this  subject. 
The  name  of  Lardner  is  another  name  for  piety,  tal- 
ents, learning.  Few  men  have  been  distinguished  for 
higher  and  sounder  attainments;  few  have  been 
more  illustrious  for  the  rare  assemblage  of  virtues, 
which  adorned  their  characters ;  and  none,  it  may 
safely  be  said,  none  has  investigated  so  patiently  and 
thoroughly  the  whole  grounds  of  Christianity.  Of 
his  candour,  sincerity,  love  of  truth,  and  judicious 
zeal,  it  is  sufficient  proof,  that  his  work  is  universally 
quoted  by  christians  of  all  persuasions,  as  the  very 
first  in  our  language,  or  in  any  language,  on  this  sub- 
ject. It  is  a  standard  to  which  all  refer,  the  store- 
house from  which  succeeding  writers  have  derived 
their  amplest  treasures.  Yet  Lardner  was  a  Unitari- 
an, and  according  to  your  mode  of  judging,  no  chris- 
tian. That  is,  the  man,  who  is  universally  allowed 
to  have  combined  a  greater  number  of  qualifications, 
than  any  other,  for  the  inquiry,  and  to  have  been 
more  successful  than  any  other  in  establishing  the 
truth  of  Christianity,  is  himself  to  be  denied  the  name 
of  christian  ! 

The  same  remark  will  apply,  Avith  different  de- 
grees of  force,  to  all  Unitarians,  who  have  written  in 
defence  of  the  christian  religion.  The  learned  and 
pious  Dr.  Samuel  Clarke  is  no  longer  to  be  called  a 
christian,  notwithstanding  the  powerful  defence  of 
christian  truth,  contained  in  his  celebrated  Lectures. 
Priestlej^,  also,  wrote  largely  on  the  evidences  of  Chris- 
tianity. Few  writers  have  taken  up  the  argument 
on  so  large  a  scale,  or  traced  it  with  so  much  perspi- 
12 


90  (JHRISTIAJV  NAME  AAD  CHARITY.  [part  ii. 

cuity  and  minuteness  through  all  its  bearings.  Infide- 
lity has  never  been  met  by  a  more  formidable  oppo- 
nent. If  there  is  less  of  condensed  method  and  rigid 
logic  in  his  arguments,  than  in  those  of  some  other  wri- 
ters, he  is  certainly  unequalled  in  the  fertility  of  his  to- 
pics, his  ingenious  illustration,  and  in  that  lucid,  persua- 
sive mode  of  writing,  Avhich  conducts  the  mind  irresist- 
ibly to  the  point  at  which  he  aims.  This  was  a  subject 
in  which  he  felt  a  peculiar,  and  a  serious  interest.  It 
employed  his  youthful  pen,  and  engaged  the  labours 
of  his  latest  years.  But  notwithstanding  a  life  thus 
spent  in  proving  the  truth,  and  impressing  the  impor- 
tance of  the  christian  religion,  it  is  at  length  discov- 
ered, that  Priestley  was  no  christian ! 

Look  back  to  the  famous  controversy,  which 
sprung  from  a  vain  and  subtle  philosophy,  and  which 
was  at  its  height  a  century  ago  in  England.  Who 
were  the  men,  that  laboured  most  successfully  in  baf- 
fling the  talents,  ingenuity,  and  learning,  of  Tindal, 
Bolingbroke,  Chubb,  Morgan,  Collins,  and  their  nu- 
merous coadjutors  ?  By  far  the  most  able  opponents 
of  these  philosophers  were  Unitarians.  Read  Dr. 
Clarke's  early  Reflections  on  Toland's  Amyntor,  and 
his  powerful  Answer  to  Collins  at  a  maturer  age  ; 
read  Chandler's  Defence  of  the  Christian  Religion 
in  reply  to  Collins,  which  was  highly  commended  by 
Archbishop  Seeker  ;  read  James  Foster's  eloquent 
Defence  of  the  Christian  Revelation  against  Tindal ; 
read  in  Benson's  Reasonableness,  and  in  his  Reflec- 
tions, not  only  a  confutation  of  the  principal  argu- 
ments of  Deism,  but  an  able  defence  of  the  christian 
scheme;  read  Whiston  and  Lowman against  Collins, 


LET.  I.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  91 

and  Lowman  against  Morgan ;  read  bishop  Clayton 
against  Bolingbroke  ; — read  these  writings,  and  oth- 
ers of  a  similar  kind,  which  Avill  readily  come  to  yom* 
recollection,  and  then  tell  us  Avhether  Christianity 
owes  nothing  to  Unitarians.  Whoever  will  pursue 
the  subject  with  candour  and  impartiality,  will  ac- 
knowledge, that  no  class  of  writers  has  done  more  to 
neutralize  the  poison  of  infidelity,  or  to  establish  on  a 
firm  foundation  the  kingdom  of  the  Saviour.  These 
are  the  men  to  whom  you  deny  the  name  of  chris- 
tians. 

Bishop  Hoadly  defended  with  great  ability  the 
truth  and  divinity  of  the  Christian  religion,  in  his  let- 
ter to  Fleetwood  on  Miracles,  in  his  treatise  on  the 
ancient  Prophets,  and  particularly  in  his  Queries  oc- 
casioned by  Collins's  Discourse  of  Free  Thinking. 
His  extraordinary  powers  Avere  never  employed  with 
more  earnestness,  or  effect,  than  on  these  subjects.* 

The  Rev.  John  Jackson,  distinguished  for  the 
part  he  took  in  the  Bangorian  Controversy,  and  for 
his  defence  of  Clarke  against  Waterland,  engaged 
in  support  of  the  evidences  of  Christianity.  He 
wrote  against  Tindal  and  Collins,  and  in  proof  of  re- 
vealed religion  from  miracles  and  prophecy  in  answer 
to  Morgan. 

The  learned  Joseph  Hallet  published  several  arti- 
cles against  Woolston,  Morgan,  Chubb,  particularly 
on  the  miracles  of  our  Saviour.! 

*  Hoadly's  Works,  vol.  I.  p.  5,  107,  143. 

t  Ballet's  Notes  and  Discourses,  Vol.  II.  p.  175. 


92  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY  .  [part  it. 

Caleb  Hcmmincr  distinguished  himself  in  the  same 
work,  in  the  midst  of  numerous  other  labours  in  the 
cause  of  christian  truth  and  piety.  He  wrote 
against  Chubb,  against  the  arguments  of  deism  gene- 
rally, and  in  favour  of  the  christian  miracles. 

Wakefield  also  Avrote  a  treatise  on  the  evidences 
of  Christianity.* 

Michael  Dodson,  the  learned  translator  of  Isaiah, 
although  a  layman,  did  much  service  to  Christianity 
by  his  writings.  He  was  a  man  of  exemplary  piety, 
a  lover  of  truth  and  freedom,  of  great  mildness  and 
humanity  of  disposition,  and  in  all  respects  of  uncom- 
mon excellence  of  character.  Yet  Dodson,  as  well  as 
Hoadly,  Jackson,  Hallet,  Hemming,  and  Wakefield, 
was  a  Unitarian,  and,  according  to  your  rule  of  judg- 
ing, neither  he,  nor  they,  are  to  be  ranked  among 
christians.! 

In  your  Sermon  you  speak  of  Locke  as  a  christian  ; 
but  you  certainly  cannot  suppose  the  definition  of  this 

*  See  a  work  entitled,  Evidences  ofCiiristianity,  or  a  Collection  of  Remarks 
intended  to  display  the  Excellence,  recnininend  the  Purity,  illustrate  the  Char- 
acter, and  evince  the  Authenticity,  of  the  Christian  Religion.  By  Gilbert 
Wakefield. 

+  Dodson  resided  in  London,  and  was  among  the  first,  who  associated  with 
Mr.  Lindsey  in  oponing  a  Unitarian  place  of  worship  in  Essex  Street.  He  was 
early  a  member  of  the  "Society  for  promoting  the  Knowledge  of  the  Scrip- 
tures," formed  in  1783.  He  wrote  several  articles  in  the  two  volumes  of  Co»?i- 
7nentarics  and  L'ways  published  by  that  Society.  Among  others  furnished  by 
liirn  were  translations  of  parts  of  Isaiah  with  notes.  These  were  specimens  of 
his  future  work,  which  appeared  in  1790,  entitled,  "A  New  Translation  of 
Isaiah,  with  Notes  supplementary  to  thos»of  Dr.  Lowth,  late  Bishop  of  Lon- 
ilon,  and   containing  Remarks  on  many  Parts  of  liis  Translation  and  Notes." 

The  specimens  first  published  in  1784  were  ajijjroved  by  Bishop  Lowth  in 
acompliuifntary  note  to  ihQ  author. 


LET.  I.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  93 

term,  which  is  contained  in  your  Reply,  will  apply 
to  the  sentiments  of  Locke.  I  shall  pass  over  the 
question  for  the  present,  which  you  have  raised,  re- 
specting his  Unitarian  sentiments.  I  will  only  re- 
mark, that  when  you  expressed  an  opinion  so  decid- 
edly opposed  to  universal  belief,  it  Avould  have  been 
quite  proper  to  give  some  reasons.  And  Locke 
must  still  be  considered  a  Unitarian,  till  he  can  be 
proved  a  Trinitarian  ;  a  task,  which  it  is  not  likely 
you  will  soon  undertake.  At  all  events,  he  had  no 
faith  in  the  assemblage  of  articles,  which  you  denomi- 
nate the  essence  of  Christianity,  and  without  believing 
which,  you  say,  no  one  can  be  called  a  christian.  His 
whole  treatise  on  the  Reasonableness  of  Christianity 
bears  witness  to  this  truth.  For  the  leading  object 
of  that  work  is  to  show,  that  "  the  Gospel  was  writ- 
ten to  induce  men  into  a  belief  of  this  proposition, 
'  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  the  Messiah,'  which  if 
they  believed,  they  should  have  life."*  He  says 
nothing  about  total  depravity,  the  atonement,  the 
"sanctifying  spirit  of  an  Almighty  Surety,"  nor  any 
of  your  peculiar  doctrines.  Yet  who  has  done  more 
to  elucidate  the  sacred  Scriptures,  or  to  prove  the 
consistency  and  reasonableness  of  the  religion  of  Je- 
sus ?  Your  rule,  however,  will  take  from  him  the 
christian  name. 

Examples  of  Unitarians,  who  have  been  zealous 
and  able  defenders  of  the  christian  faith,  might  be 
multiplied.     Bonnet  of  Geneva  is  a  memorable  one 

*  Reasonableness  of  Chvistianity,  sec.  ix. 


94  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  [part  ii. 

He  has  stated  the  argument  with  great  compass  of 
thought,  and  philosophical  precision.  I  do  not  say, 
that  Paley  was  a  Unitarian,  but  I  beHeve  he  was, 
because  I  have  seen  nothing  in  his  writings,  which 
indicates  the  contrary.  Several  Unitarians  now  liv- 
ing, both  in  England  and  this  country,  have  written 
on  the  evidences  of  Christianity  with  such  earnestness, 
force  of  reasoning,  and  eloquence,  as  do  equal  credit 
to  their  zeal,  their  piety,  talents,  and  love  of  truth. 

Many  instances  might  be  adduced  among  Unitarian 
writers  of  the  present  day  in  England,  which  prove 
their  zeal  and  labours  in  the  cause  of  christian  truth. 
One  will  be  sufficient  in  this  place.  Mr.  Belsham's 
"  Summary  view  of  the  Evidence  and  practical  Im- 
portance of  the  christian  Revelation,"  contains  a 
brief  and  comprehensive  statement  of  the  principal 
evidences  of  Christianity,  expressed  in  the  author's 
usually  perspicuous  style.  He  deduces  his  proofs 
from  the  testimony  of  the  Jewish  Scriptures,  from 
history,  miracles,  and  the  internal  evidence  of  the 
christian  revelation  ;  and  concludes  with  many  excel- 
lent remarks  on  the  practical  influence  of  the  chris- 
tian doctrines. 

Among  the  Unitarians  of  this  country,  there  has 
been  no  want  of  writers  in  defence  of  Christianity. 
Let  me  refer  you  particularly  to  Dr.  Channlng's  "Lec- 
ture on  the  Evidences  of  Revealed  Religion,"  deliv- 
ered before  the  University  at  Cambridge.  Where 
have  you  seen  the  argument  from  miracles  stated 
with  more  clearness,  ingenuity  and  force ;  more 
earnestness  and  ability  ;  where    have  you   witnessed 


LET.  1.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  95 

more  sincerity  and  religious  fervour,  or  a  warmer 
zeal  in  establishing  the  truth  and  divinity  of  the  re- 
vealed doctrines  of  Jesus?  Read,  also.  Dr.  Chan- 
ning's  two  sermons  on  Infidelity,  published  some 
years  before,  in  Avhich  the  most  popular  arguments 
against  the  christian  religion  are  considered  and  an- 
swered. Read  Mr.  Everett's  learned  work  entitled 
a  "  Defence  of  Christianity  ;"  and  Mr.  Gary's  writings 
on  the  same  subject.  Examine  a  brief  and  logical 
argument  by  Dr.  Freeman,  relating  to  the  early  his- 
torical proofs  of  Christianity.  Read  Mr.  Col  man  on 
the  miraculous  character  of  Christ,  and  Mr.  Ed- 
do  wes  on  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecies  in  the  com- 
ing of  the  Messiah.  Read  the  General  Repository 
and  the  Christian  Disciple  ;  read  the  sermons  of  the 
lamented  Anthony  Forster;  read  almost  any  work, 
io  fact,  written  by  a  Unitarian,  and  you  will  find  more 
or  less  indirect  confirmation  of  the  truth  of  the  chris- 
tian religion. 

Such  have  been  the  labours  of  Unitarians  in  this 
country  during  the  short  space  of  ten  years.  What 
have  the  orthodox  done  in  the  mean  time  ?  We 
often  hear  them  deprecating  the  ravages  of  infidelity, 
but  where  shall  we  look  for  the  barriers,  which  they 
have  raised  to  oppose  its  progress  ?  Have  they  done 
as  much  in  a  century  ?     Show  us  the  evidence. 

Besides,  let  us  not  forget  the  pious  labours  of  two 
or  three  others,  although  they  were  performed  at  an 
earlier  period.  Where  has  been  a  more  popular 
tract,  than  Dr.  John  Clarke's  small  treatise  on  the 
evidences  of  Christianity  ?     It  has  been  through  many 


96  CHRISTIAiV  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  [vart  ii. 

editions  in  England  and  this  country.  It  is  now  a 
standard  work  for  distribution  ainono-  Unitarians,  as 
well  as  Trinitarians.  Read  Buckniinster's  Sermons, 
and  acknowledge,  that  eloquence  and  piety  have  sel- 
dom been  combined  in  a  more  eminent  degree  in 
suj3porting  tlie  truths,  and  defending  the  divinity 
of  the  christian  religion.  It  must  be  remembered, 
however,  that  Clarke  and  Buck  minster  were  Unitari- 
ans. Let  me  add,  also,  that  the  Unitarians  of  this 
country  have  published  and  circulated  Hartley's 
work  on  the  Truth  of  the  Christian  Religion,  and 
teach  in  their  schools  the  popular  treatises  of  Gro- 
tius,  Butler,  Paley,  and  Porteus.  Such  are  the 
proofs  on  which  some  of  their  zealous  orthodox 
brethren  build  the  charge,  that  they  are  no  chris- 
tians.* 

I  will  mention  only  one  example  more,  and  this 
of  comparatively  early  date.  It  is  that  of  Socinus. 
His  treatise,  on  the  Authority  of  the  Sacred  Scrip- 
tures, was  translated  into  several  languages,  and  read 
and  admired  throughout  all  Europe.  Grotius  is  said 
to  have  drawn  largely  from  this  work  :  and  it  was 
highly  praised  even  by  an  English  Bishop.  The 
cause  of  Christianity  has  seldom  been  more  ably  ad- 
vocated, than  in  this  little  treatise.  The  author  rea- 
sons like  one,  who  felt  the  importance  of  the  subject. 
His  arrangement  is  not  always   the  most  happy,   but 


*  See  ihe  Unitarian  Miscellany,  Vol.  I.  p.  213,  311. — Dr.  Freeman's  Sei- 
mons,  Third  Edition,  p.  70. — Eddovvcs's  Sermons,  p.  65. — Colman's  Sermons, 
p.  71. — riofcssor  Everett's  D'jfunce  of  Cliristianiiy.— Buckminster's  Sermons, 
p.  1,22. 


I.ET.  I.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  97 

his  arguments  are  condensed  and  forcible.  Tliey  dis- 
play the  workings  of  a  powerful  mind,  striving  to 
substantiate  and  impress  the  important  truths  of  the 
christian  religion.  But  all  this  is  nothing  with  you. 
The  mode  of  judging,  which  you  have  adopted,  ex- 
cludes him,  as  well  as  all  the  other  illustrious  defend- 
ers of  the  faith,  whom  I  have  mentioned,  from  the 
privilege  of  even  having  the  name  of  christians.* 

I  have  dwelt  the  longer  on  this  point,  to  show  the 
extreme  absurdity  of  your  rule.  The  men  them- 
selves, in  whom  Christianity  has  found  its  firmest  and 
most  zealous  supporters,  and  who  have  employed 
their  best  powers  in  proving  its  truth  and  value,  are 
not  to  be  considered  worthy  of  the  christian  name  ! 
What  shall  we  think  of  principles  which  lead  to  such 
a  result? 

Emlyn  has  a  pointed  and  forcible  argument  on  this 
subject.  Every  one  knows  how  much  he  suffered 
for  his  faith  by  persecution,  fines,  and  imprisonment. 
In  the  midst  of  these  afflictions,  which  he  was  com- 
pelled to  endure  on  account  of  his  constancy  in  adhe- 
ring to  what  he  deemed  a    true  christian   belief,  he 

*  The  treatise-De  Auctorilate  Sacra  Scnptura  was  first  published  in  1570, 
without  the  name  of  the  author.  An  edition  was  afterwards  published  at  Se- 
ville, by  Ferrerius,  a  Jesuit,  who  intimated  in  the  preface  that  he  was  the  au- 
thor ;  but  he  was  detected,  from  having  advanced  sentiments  in  that  place 
contrary  to  those  in  the  woik  itself.  It  was  at  length  published  with  the  au- 
thor's name,  translated  into  Dutch  and  French,  and  printed  in  different  parts 
of  Europe.  It  was  translated  into  English  by  E.  Coonibe,  a  clergyman  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  published  in  1731.  This  statement  of  facts  is  suffi- 
cient evidence  of  the  high  estimation  in  which  it  was  held.  Vorstius  published 
it  with  notes,  and  also  with  remarks  of  certain  Divines  of  Basil.  It  is  found  in 
Latin  among  the  writings  of  Socinus,  in  the  first  volume  of  the  Bibliotheca 
Fratrum  Polonorum.  p.  265. 

1.3 


98  CHRISTIAN  ^'AME  AND  CHARITY.  [part  ii. 

was  assailed  with  the   cliarge  of  being  no  christian. 
He  thus  rephes  to  his  opponent. 

"  Can  you  justify  your  rashness  in  saying,  that 
Unitarians  are  not  christians,  when,  to  be  a  cliristian, 
is  to  own  the  authority,  and  receive  the  doctrine  of 
Christ  according  to  their  best  judgment,  which,  one 
might  think,  a  charity  asHttle  as  yours  might  readily 
grant  they  do,  Avho  in  their  beHef  go  against  all  tem- 
poral motives,  and  bear  the  heavy  wrath  of  their 
persecutors?  Do  they  not  Avorship  the  God  of 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob?  The  same  God  that 
the  Apostles  worshipped,  ivho  bowed  their  knees  to  the 
God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ? 

"  Nay,  do  they  not  worship  the  same  God,  that  our 
Lord  Christ  himself,  our  great  pattern,  worshipped  ? 
And  are  they  not  christians  in  their  worship,  who 
worship  as  Christ  himself  did?  I  pray,  who  are 
christians,  if  not  these?  Did  he  not  say,  J\ly  God 
and  your  God ;  that  is,  you  must  have  and  own  the 
same  God  with  me  ;  or,  you  and  I  have  the  same 
object  of  our  faith  and  joy?  Do  you  pretend  to 
show,  that  even  Jesus  Christ  worshipped  a  Son,  or  a 
Holy  Ghost  ?  Show  it,  and  they  will  imitate  him. 
In  the  mean  time,  if  having  just  the  same  God  and 
object  of  suj)reme  worship,  as  the  man  Christ  Jesus 
had,  must  make  them  not  christians,  they  envy  not 
any  who  claim  the  name  of  the  only  christians  on  the 
contrary  ground."* 

This  is  the  reasoning  of  a  man,  who  spoke  from 
experience    and   feeling,  as  well  as   from  Scripture, 

"  Emiyii's  Works,  \o\.  U.  p.  93. 


T.ET.  r.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY,  99 

conscience,  nature,  and  common  sense.  It  shows  in  a 
strong  light  the  folly  of  denying  the  name  of  christian 
to  those,  who  imitate  the  Saviour  and  Apostles  in 
their  faith  and  worship,  and  who  do  not  hesitate  to 
suffer  any  calamity  for  the  sake  of  that  very  name, 
which  the  officious  charity  of  their  brethren  would 
take  from  them. 

In  short,  there  seems  to  be  something  extremely 
positive  and  dogmatical  in  selecting  any  definite  num- 
ber of  doctrines,  and  calling  them  the  essence  of 
Christianity,  and  in  passing  on  all  persons  not  receiv- 
ing them  the  censure  of  exclusion  from  the  christian 
name  and  fellowship.  It  is  hardly  possible,  for  any 
one  to  do  this,  without  assuming  it  as  an  immutable 
principle,  that  he  stands  on  the  unassailable  eminence 
of  truth.  It  is  natural  enough,  that  every  person 
should  think  himself  right,  and  all  the  rest  of  the 
world  wrong ;  but  it  requires  a  great  stretch  of  confi- 
dence in  one's  own  opinions  to  induce  him  to  set  him- 
self up  as  a  universal  judge,  and  to  endeavour  to 
wrest  that  liberty  from  another,  which  is  inherent  in 
his  moral  nature. 

This,  in  protestant  countries,  is  going  much  be- 
yond popish  infallibility.  The  Pope  traces  back  his 
descent  from  the  Apostles,  and  believes  in  the  conti- 
nually guiding  influence  of  the  Great  Head  of  the 
Church,  in  preserving  the  true  faith  among  men. 
According  to  the  Catholic  system,  there  is  some  rea- 
son for  believing  in  the  infallibility  of  men,  who  are 
thought  to  be  divinely  appointed,  as  depositaries  of 
the  true  faith.     Protestants   have  given  up  this  no- 


100  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY,  [part  h. 

tion,  and  now  to  act  on  it^  is  absurd.*  Chillingworth 
has  pertinently  said  ;  "  Require  of  christians  only  to 
beheve  Christ,  and  to  call  no  man  master  but  him 
only  ;  let  those  leave  claiming  infallibility,  that  have 
no  title  to  it ;  and  let  them,  that  in  their  words  dis- 
claim it,  disclaim  it  likewise  in  their  actions."  If  we 
must  have  dictators  in  faith,  let  us  go  back  to  Popes 
and  Councils.  We  shall  then  at  least  have  the  ad- 
vantage of  antiquity  and  numbers.  But  while  we 
profess  to  walk  in  the  light  and  liberty  of  conscience, 
and  to  call  no  man  master  but  Christ,  let  us  think, 
and  reason,  and  judge  for  ourselves,  and  not  dictate 
to  others.  Let  us  act  the  part  of  fallible,  as  well  as 
rational  and  accountable  beings. 

It  is  a  bold  and  unjustifiable  assumption  of  authori- 
ty in  any  one,  to  decide  on  the  faith  of  another,  or  to 
declare  whether  this  other  believes  enough  to  be 
called  a  christian.  It  is  a  case,  which  is  exclusively 
concerned  with  the  conscience  and  conviction  of  the 
individual.  Whoever  is  confident,  that  he  has  made 
the  best  exertions  of  which  he  is  capable,  and  exami- 
ned with  seriousness,  sincerity,  a  firm  reliance  on  di- 

*  In  reading  some  parts  of  your  Reply,  one  is  forcibly  reminded  of  a  Dedi- 
cation to  the  Pope,  prefixed  to  a  satirical  piece  written  by  Sir  Richard  Steele. 
"  The  most  sagacious  persons,"  says  the  writer  in  addressing  the  Pope,  "  have 
not  been  able  to  discover  any  other  difference  between  us,  as  to  the  main  prin- 
ciple of  all  doctrine,  government,  worship,  and  discipline,  but  this  one,  that 
you  cannot  err  in  any  thing  you  determine,  and  we  never  do.  That  is,  in 
other  words,  you  arc  infallible,  and  we  are  always  in  the  RiCiHT. 
We  cannot  but  esteeni  tlic  advantage  to  be  exceedingly  on  our  side  in  this 
case,  because  we  liave  all  the  benefits  of  infallibility^  without  the  absurdity  of 
pretending  toil,  and  without  the  uneasy  task  of  maintaining  a  point  so  shockr 
jng  to  the  understanding  of  men." 


LET.  I.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  JQl 

vine  aid,  and  a  proper  sense  of  the  importance  of  the 
subject,  and  then  confesses  himself  to  be  a  christian  ; 
or,  in  other  words,  whoever  is  conscientious  in  hold- 
ing what  he  believes  to  be  a  true  christian  faith, — 
every  such  person  is  entitled  to  the  name,  and  it  is 
equally  an  encroachment  on  the  claims  of  christian 
liberty,  and  the  rights  of  conscience,  to  attempt  to 
take  it  from  him.  It  is  in  violation  of  the  laws  of 
peace,  without  sanction  in  the  instructions  and  exam- 
ple of  Christ,  and  in  no  accordance  with  the  spirit  of 
the  Gospel. 


LETTER  II. 

On  Charity^  as  explained  in  the  Scriptures,  and  prac- 
tised by  the  first  Christians. 

SIR, 

We  come  now  to  discuss  a  very  important  branch 
of  christian  faith  and  duty.  We  are  to  inquire  into 
the  nature  and  extent  of  that  Charity,  which  the  Sa- 
viour so  repeatedly  urged  on  his  followers,  and  which 
the  Apostles  never  ceased  to  inculcate.  The  com- 
mon notions  on  this  subject  you  think  incorrect. 
There  is  a  belief,  you  say,  that  "  charity  consists  in 
entertaining  a  favourable  opinion  of  others,  however 
widely  they  may  differ  from  us  on  the  most  essential 


102  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  [part  ii. 

points ;  in  supposing,  that  they  have  inquired  after 
truth  as  candidly  as  we  have  done  ;  and  in  taking  for 
granted,  that  there  is  as  much  reason  to  hope  they 
will  finally  be  accepted  of  God,  as  that  we  ourselves 
shall  be  accepted."  To  this  sense  of  the  term  you 
take  great  exceptions,  and  affirm,  that  "though  cur- 
rent enough  in  common  society,  among  a  thousand 
other  popular  crudities,  it  is  certainly  not  found  in 
Scripture,  and  ought  to  receive  no  countenance  from 
any  accurate  thinker."  By  this  it  seems,  that  the 
mass  of  mankind  are  mistaken  respecting  one  of  the 
fundamental  principles  of  the  christian  religion. 

We  proceed  to  consider  your  mode  of  rectifying 
this  mistake.  Let  us  commence  with  your  definition- 
"  The  word  charity,  as  used  in  Scripture  is  equivalent 
to  the  word  love.  To  exercise  charity  towards 
another,  in  the  language  of  the  Bible,  is  to  love  him. 
T  may,  therefore,  exercise  the  most  perfect  charity 
towards  one,  whose  principles  I  reprobate,  and  whose 
conduct  I  abhor,  and  ought  to  abhor."  Before  I 
examine  the  merits  of  this  definition,  as  founded  on 
the  language  and  spirit  of  Scripture,  allow  me  to  ask 
one  or  two  questions.  You  make  the  term  chanty 
exactly  synonymous  with  love.  When  you  speak  of 
loving  a  man,  what  is  the  specific  object  of  your  affec- 
tion ?  Is  not  this  comprised  in  such  of  his  moral 
qualities,  as  come  within  your  notice,  and  gain  your 
approbation  ?  Take  a  man's  principles  and  his  con- 
duct away,  and  what  is  left,  which  you  can  cither 
love  or  hate?  His  principles  are  interwoven  with 
all  the  moral  elements  of  his  nature,  and  his  conduct 


T.rT.  11.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  103 

is  the  only  test  we  can  have  of  the  rectitude  and  pu- 
rity of  his  motives;  or,  in  other  words,  the  principles 
and  the  conduct  constitute  the  whole  moral  man. 
Now,  what  kind  of  love  is  that,  which  is  extended  to 
a  person,  whose  principles  are  to  be  reprobated,  and 
whose  conduct  is  to  be  abhorred  ?  Surely  not  the 
love  of  a  virtuous,  pious  mind.  Such  a  mind  can  love 
only  virtue  and  piety.  Hence  the  very  terms  of  your 
definition  prove  its  looseness  and  fallacy,  and  suggest 
the  necessity  of  a  virtue  essentially  different  in  its 
operations  from  the  general  principle  of  love  ;  a  vir- 
tue, by  which  the  compassion  and  good  affections  of 
our  nature  may  be  brought  into  exercise,  in  favour 
even  of  the  unprincipled  and  the  vicious,  whom  we 
cannot  in  any  proper  sense  of  the  word  love^  except 
in  proportion  as  we  are  willing  to  dispense  with  holi- 
ness and  virtue  in  ourselves. 

And  again,  on  the  principles  of  Calvinism  it  is  im- 
possible for  the  charity^  which  you  define,  to  be  ex- 
tended to  any  but  a  very  small  part  of  the  human 
race.  How  can  a  good  man  love  any  of  his  fellow 
beings,  who  are  under  a  sentence  of  eternal  reproba- 
tion by  an  unalterable  decree  of  God,  Avho  are  totally 
depraved,  destitute  of  all  good  and  wholly  inclined  to 
all  evil,  whose  every  deed  is  wickedness,  and  whose 
every  thought  is  rebellion  against  their  Maker?  If 
this  be  possible,  it  is  a  mystery  in  ethics,  which  I  con- 
fess my  inability  to  solve.  No  good  man  could  love 
such  beings,  because  every  thing  in  them  must  be 
wicked,  odious,  and  repulsive.  He  might,  even  under 
these  circumstances,  have  for  them  a  fellow  feeling, 


104  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  [part  il. 

or  an  affection,  which  the  world  have  united  in  call- 
ing charity,  because  this  dreadful  condition  would  not 
be  their  fault,  but  their  misfortune  in  having  been 
born  into  the  world.  Calvinism,  therefore,  requires 
something  more,  than  your  general  virtue  of  love» 
unless  it  would  teach  its  advocates  to  withhold  all 
civility  and  kindness  from  the  great  mass  of  men, 
who  were  either  brought  into  the  world  by  the 
Deity  with  the  express  purpose  of  making  them  eter- 
nally miserable,  or  who  have  not  yet  been  released 
from  the  bondage  of  their  inherent  depravity  by  a 
miraculous  visitation  of  divine  grace. 

But  these  distinctions,  you  will  say,  perhaps,  are 
•'  popular  crudities,"  the  pastimes  of  erring  reason, 
which  may  be  well  enough  in  common  use,  but  arc 
not  sanctioned  by  the  Scriptures,  and  "ought  to  re- 
ceive no  countenance  from  any  accurate  thinker." 
That  charity  requires  us  to  think  favourably  of  the 
opinions  of  our  brethren,  to  suppose  them  sincere  and 
conscientious  in  the  search  of  truth,  and  to  indulge  a 
hope,  that  they  may  be  in  a  fair  way  of  meeting  the 
divine  acceptance,  you  consider  a  vulgar  notion,  and 
"  assert  with  confidence,"  that  it  makes  no  part  of 
the  true  Scripture  doctrine.  This  was  a  point  of 
much  importance  in  your  apology,  or  defence,  for  if 
your  position  can  be  made  out,  then  it  follows,  that 
Unitarians  are  beside  themselves  to  imagine  any  want 
of  charity  in  those,  who,  in  their  kind  solicitude,  call 
them  heretics,  utter  anathemas  against  their  o])inions, 
and  in  the  spirit  of  christian  love  console  them  with 
the  comforting  declarations,  that  they  arc  not  chris- 


T.ET.  ir.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  105 

tians  at  all,  and  no  more  in  the  waj  of  salvation  than 
Mohammedans  and  Jews,  that  they  cling  to  "  dread- 
ful, soul  destroying  errors,"  and  in  their  morals  are 
to  be  numbered  among  the  loose  and  licentious,  upon 
whose  lives  religion  has  no  purifying  power.  These 
are  all  to  be  taken  as  the  genuine  fruits  of  charity, 
since  it  is  made  to  appear,  that  they  may  be  accom- 
panied with  a  due  degree  of  scriptural  love. 

Let  us  come  now  to  the  primary  object  of  inquiry, 
and  endeavour  to  ascertain  what  the  Scriptures 
teach  respecting  the  virtue  of  charity,  and  whether 
it  be  not  allowable  to  exercise  this  virtue  towards  the 
sincere  opinions  of  our  fellow  christians. 

When  you  say,  that  "  in  the  language  of  Scrip- 
ture charity  is  equivalent  to  the  word  /ot;e,"  I  know 
not  what  you  mean,  unless  it  be  that  the  original 
Greek  word,  which  denotes  the  general  principle  of 
love,  is  sometimes  rendered  into  English  by  the  word 
charity.  This  is  not  denied.  It  proves  nothing, 
however,  except  that  there  Avas  no  term  in  Greek 
exactly  corresponding  to  the  word  charity  in  English. 
The  meaning  of  the  Greek  word  is  to  be  determined, 
like  the  meaning  of  almost  every  other  word,  not  by 
assigning  to  it  an  arbitrary,  undeviating  signification, 
but  by  the  connexion  in  which  it  stands ;  and  this  is 
no  difficult  thing.  Such  an  attempt  at  induction 
might  have  amazed  the  schoolmen,  and  confounded 
Aquinas  himself,  but  since  the  days  of  Locke  and 
Reid  the  province  of  thought  is  too  well  understood, 
and  the  principles  of  language  are  too  easily  appre- 
hended, to  admit  of  difficulties  in  this  process.  It  is 
14 


106  CHRISTIAN  NAME  A.ND  CHARITY.  [pxrt  i: 

a  rule  as  old  as  Hilary,  that  the  force  of  words  de- 
pends on  their  sense,  and  not  on  their  sound.  Verba 
noil  sono  sed  sensu  sapiunt.  This  rule  is  not  to  be  de- 
serted in  the  Scriptures. 

Sclileusner,  wliose  accuracy  and  discrimination  will 
not  be  called  in  question  by  any  Biblical  scholar,  has 
assigned  no  less  than  six  distinct  significations  to  the 
word  of  which  Ave  are  now  speaking.  I  will  not  enu- 
merate these,  but  mention  three  only,  which  will  be 
sufficient  to  show  the  incorrectness  of  your  statement. 

Firsts  it  means  the  general  principle  oflove^  or  "  an 
invariable  preference  of  Good,"  as  this  principle  is 
defined  by  a  late  acute  and  philosophical  writer.* 
This  is  the  kind  of  love,  which  the  Deity  exercises 
towards  his  rational  creatures,  and  which  they  are 
capable  of  exercising  towards  him.  The  word  al- 
ways implies  this  sense,  when  it  is  used  to  denote  the 
love  of  God. 

Secondly,  it  sometimes  means  alms-giving,  or  the 
conferring  of  benefits.  St.  Paul  praises  the  Thessalo- 
nians  for  their  labour  of  love,  or  their  kind  offices  in 
relieving  his  wants  and  ministering  to  his  comfort. 
He  says  to  the  Hebrews,  '^God  is  not  unrighteous  to 
forget  your  work  and  labour  of  love,  which  ye  have 
showed  toward  his  name,  in  that  ye  have  ministered 
to  the  saints,  and  do  minister."  Here  the  Apostle 
alludes  to  their  kindness  in  contributing  to  the  tempo- 
ral necessities  of  the  persons,  who  had  laboured 
among  them    in  the   ministry.     In    both    cases   the 

*  Cogan's  Pliilosophical  Treatise  ou  the  Passions,  p.  25. 


XET.  ii.J  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  107 

word  has  the  sense  of  charity,  as  we  use  the  term  to 
denote  alms-giving.* 

lliirdly,  a  meaning  of  the  word,  whicli  is  by  far 
the  most  frequent  in  the  New  Testament,  is  that  em- 
bracing the  thoughts,  feelings,  and  actions  of  men  in 
their  intercourse  with  one  another.  This  is  the  charity,' 
which  the  Apostle  says  is  greater  than  faith  or  hope, 
and  which  is  so  beautifully  described  in  the  thirteenth 
chapter  of  the  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  It  is 
that  virtue,  which  displays  itself  in  active  deeds  of 
benevolence,  gentleness,  mercy ;  which  teaches  us 
humility,  forbearance,  and  a  just  sense  of  the  wants 
and  the  deserts  of  our  felloAV  men  ;  and  which,  in  short, 
preserves  and  regulates  the  order  of  society,  by  re- 
straining the  passions,  and  bringing  out  the  good 
qualities  of  our  nature.  It  is  a  virtue  arising  entirely 
out  of  the  condition  of  men,  their  mutual  dependence, 
and  the  necessity  of  reciprocal  benefits.  If  human 
nature  were  perfect,  if  we  had  neither  faults  nor 
wants,  such  a  virtue  could  not  exist. 


*  As  most  of  the  valuable  Manuscripts,  and  all  the  ancient  Greek  commen- 
tators, omit  the  word  kotth,  labour,  in  the  text  last  quoted,  Peirce,  in  accord- 
ance with  Mill,  thinks  it  was  not  written  in  the  original.  Bu.t,  as  he  justly 
observes,  the  sense  will  not  be  altered  by  leaving  it  out.  And  he  adds* 
<«  What  the  love  was  they  showed,  the  Apostle  more  fully  declares,  Heb.  x. 
33,  34.  A  very  delicate  way  he  takes  here  to  commend  the  kindness  they  had 
shown  him,  by  representing  it  to  have  been  done  out  of  respect  for  God  him- 
self." Peirce  in  Lac.  For  a  parallel  example  of  the  bounty  of  the  Philippians, 
see  Phil.  iv.  I  8, 

The  word,  nyATrn,  appears  to  be  used  in  a  similar  sense,  1  Thess.  v.  13. 
"  Esteem  them  very  highly  in  love  for  their  work's  sake."  That  is,  take  care 
to  make  proper  returns  for  tiieir  labours  by  your  deeds  of  bounty  and  charity  ; 
or,  as  Sciileusner  paraphrases  it,  Uberalitaii  in suslentandis  et  alendis  doctori- 
bus  studete. 


108  CHRISTIAN  iNAML  AiND  CHARITY.  [part  li. 

That  there  is  a  broad  and  strongly  marked  distinc- 
tion between  the  three  meanings  here  noticed,  is 
manifest  on  the  slightest  inspection.  The  same 
thing  will  be  confirmed  by  comparing  the  properties 
of  the  virtue  under  each  signification.  No  use  of  lan- 
guage will  allow  you  to  speak  of  the  charity  of  God. 
The  duties,  which  men  owe  to  one  another,  or  the 
duties  of  charity,  have  no  relation,  either  to  the 
character  or  the  actions  of  the  Supreme  Being ;  nor 
have  they  any  concern  in  our  relations  to  him.  We 
cannot  be  charitable  to  God,  although  we  may  and 
ought  to  love  him.  In  giving  alms,  our  charity  may 
prompt  us  to  relieve  the  distresses  of  a  man,  whose 
infamy  and  vices  utterly  forbid  the  exercise  of  love. 
We  may  comply  with  the  commands  of  our  Saviour, 
and  have  charity  for  our  enemies  in  both  of  the  two 
latter  senses  above  mentioned,  but  we  have  not  pow- 
er to  do  so  much  violence  to  human  nature,  as  to  love 
them  in  the  first  sense,  Avhile  we  know  they  are  our 
enemies,  and  resolved  to  do  us  an  injury  when  an  op- 
portunity shall  offer. 

But  there  is  no  occasion  to  dwell  on  this  point. 
Nothing  can  be  more  clear  than  these  distinctions, 
and  I  have  only  designed  to  show  by  a  fcAV  hints 
with  what  disregard  of  all  critical  precision  you 
spoke,  Avhen  you  "  asserted  with  confidence,"  that 
the  word  charity  means  precisely  the  same  thing  as 
the  word  love,  and  with  what  a  fallacious  and  un- 
scriptural  principle  you  started,  in  laying  down  the 
rules  of  conduct,  which  should  be  followed  by  chris- 
lians  of  different  persuasions  in  regard  to  each  other* 


LET.  II.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  109 

Love  is  a  principle,  charity  a  virtue  ;  love  is  an 
inclination  to  good,  charity  is  active  goodness;  love  is 
an  involuntary  emotion,  charity  a  duty  ;  love  is  an 
original  affection,  making  a  part  of  our  nature,  and 
communicated  by  the  Deity  himself,  charity  is  a  rule 
of  moral  action,  founded  on  our  condition  in  the 
world,  and  limited  to  our  intercourse  with  men ;  love 
is  a  disposition  of  the  mind,  charity  an  act  of  the  willj 
bringing  this  disposition  to  bear  on  particular  objects ; 
love  can  be  excited  only  towards  what  is  good,  chari- 
ty can  never  be  extended  to  positive  excellence,  but 
is  confined  to  the  frailty,  faults,  wants,  and  sufferings 
of  men.  Do  you  say,  after  all,  that  charity  is  only  a 
modification  of  love  ?  Let  this  be  admitted,  and  it 
will  prove  them  not  be  the  same  thing.  Every  vir- 
tue is  a  modification  of  this  principle,  yet  every  virtue 
is  not  love.  All  the  moral  attributes  of  the  Deity 
are  but  so  many  modifications  of  his  love,  but  will 
you  say  that  his  goodness,  justice,  mercy,  wisdom  are 
all  synonymous  with  love,  and  consequently  with 
each  other?  Piety,  reverence,  thanksgiving,  and 
praise  to  our  Maker,  and  also  benevolence,  tender- 
ness, sympathy,  generosity,  compassion,  lenity,  are  all 
modifications  of  this  general  principle  ;  and  it  would 
be  just  as  correct  a  use  of  language  to  say,  that  each 
of  these  virtues  is  equivalent  to  love,  as  it  is  to  say 
the  same  of  charity. 

Your  rule  may  be  applied  to  all  other  words  in  the 
New  Testament,  as  Avell  as  to  the  one  which  is  trans- 
lated love  and  charity.  Take,  for  instance,  the  word, 
which  is  usually  rendered  righteousness.      In  the  ori- 


110  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  [iartii. 

glnal  it  mc^ins  justice.  There  is,  nevertlieless,  a  very 
striking  diiTcrence  between  these  two  words  in  our  lan- 
guage. No  man  can  be  righteous  without  being  just, 
but  justice  alone  would  be  accounted  a  very  small 
part  of  righteousness.  Justice  implies  nothing  more, 
than  rendering  to  every  man  his  just  due,  while  right- 
eousness embraces  all  the  virtues  of  piety  and  mo- 
rality, and  is  nearly  the  same  as  holiness.  Your  rule 
would  require  you  to  say,  that  as  the  word  righteous- 
ness, "  as  used  in  Scripture,"  is  equivalent  to  the 
word  justice,  nothing  more  is  demanded  of  you  to  be 
a  righteous  man,  than  to  be  just,  and  that  to  pretend 
to  any  distinction  here  is  one  of  the  "  popular  crudi- 
ties," which  "  ought  to  receive  no  countenance  from 
any  accurate  thinker."  By  the  same  process,  and 
without  continuing  your  philology  much  farther,  you 
might  fall  into  the  track  of  Home  Tooke,  and  con- 
vince yourself,  that  whatever  is  commanded^  is  right 
and  just,  and  thus  discover  the  only  reason,  which 
perhaps  has  ever  been  given,  why  the  commands,  or 
in  other  words,  the  decisions,  creeds,  and  decrees  of 
councils,  conventions,  assemblies,  and  synods  should  be 
binding  on  the  consciences  and  faith  of  christians. 

Numerous  examples  of  this  sort  might  be  recurred 
to,  which  would  give  additional  proof  of  the  error  of 
your  theory,  and  the  mischievous  tendency  of  its  ap- 
plication.*    On  the  whole,  few  things  are  more  evi- 


*  The  word,  miv/xtt,  spirit,  Schlciisner  calls  Trahvnfxot,  and  assigns  to  it  \w 
less  than  hoenlysix  distinct  classes  of  significations,  as  it  is  used  in  the  New 
Testament.  Among  others  arc  life,  breath,  air,  wind  ;  the  soul,  the  mind  ;  a 
divine  influence,  the  invisible  and  extraordinary  gifts  of  the  Deity.  It  would 
be  as  proper  to  say,  that  either  of  these  is  equivalent  to  the  principal  one,  ane". 


LET.  II.]  CHRISTIAxN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  HI 

dent,  than  that  this  notion  of  charity,  by  which  you 
attempt  to  smooth  down  the  rough  features  of  your 
charges,  receives  as  httle  support  from  the  Scrip- 
tures, as  from  the  understanding,  the  prevaihng  senti- 
ments, and  the  best  feehngs  of  men. 

It  is,  moreover,  fraught  with  many  evils.  If  ad- 
mitted in  explaining  the  Scriptures,  it  would  intro- 
duce utter  confusion,  and  make  the  plainest  things  in 
the  word  of  God  ambiguous,  and  unintelligible.  If 
carried  into  practice,  it  would  have  a  most  serious, 
and  unhappy  influence  on  the  temper,  morals,  and 
character  of  christians.  It  virtually  teaches,  that  all 
the  moral  qualities  and  exercises  may  be  resolved  in- 
to the  general  principle  of  hve.  For  if  charity 
means  love,  so  does  benevolence,  and  so  do  generosi- 
ty, sympathy,  tenderness,  mercy  ;  and  the  numerous 
duties,  which  these  rules  of  virtue,  and  in  fact,  all 
rules  of  virtue,  require,  may  be  dispensed  with,  if 
you  can  satisfy  yourself,  that  you  have  abundance  of 
love.  It  is  true,  this  happy  simplicity  in  the  great 
science  of  morals  would  relieve  us  from  the  grievance 
of  thinking  favourably  of  opinions,  which  do  not  in 
all  respects  accord  with  our  own.  It  would  leave  no 
tax  on  our^  humility,  our  good  nature,  our  love  of 
truth,  or  desire  for  the  progress  of  christian  know- 
ledge. There  would  be  no  occasion  for  these  virtues, 
in  dealing  Avith  our  brethren,  while  the  only  thing  re- 
quisite was  a  due  caution  not  to  resist  the  mechani- 
cal impulse  of  love.     Unfortunately  for  this  scheme, 


that  the  word  may  always  be  understood  in  any  one  of  these  BJgnificationSj  as 
it  is  in  your  example  of  love  and  chanty. 


112  tJHRISTlAN  NAME  AiND  CHARITY.  [fart  ii. 

no  such  simplicity  exists,  either  in  the  Scriptures,    m 
the  laws  of  human  nature,  or  the  sense  of  mankind. 

I  consider  it  established,  therefore,  that  jour  views 
of  this  subject  are  erroneous,  and  that  men  have  not 
been  unwittingly  duped  into  such  a  "  crudity,"  as 
you  imagine,  in  consenting  to  make  it  a  christian  duty 
to  have  some  respect  for  the  serious  endeavours,  the 
anxious  inquiries,  and  honest  opinions  of  such,  as  have 
not  been  able  to  run  in  precisely  the  same  path  as 
themselves.  In  what  I  have  further  to  say,  it  will 
be  considered  as  settled,  that  there  is  such  a  virtue  as 
charity,  distinct  from  all  other  virtues,  and  that  this 
is  taught  in  the  Scriptures.  I  have  only  to  make  a 
few  remarks  on  the  unreasonableness,  danger,  and  evils 
of  neglecting  this  virtue,  and  blotting  it,  as  you  would 
seem  to  do,  out  of  the  catalogue  of  christian  duties. 

Charity  has  its  origin,  as  we  have  seen,  in  the  im- 
perfections of  men.  It  supposes  defects  and  faults, 
not  as  implying  crime,  or  designed  offence,  or  wilful 
perversion  of  the  gifts  of  heaven.  The  ignorance, 
prejudices,  and  errors  of  honest  men,  arise  out  of 
their  weakness,  and  not  out  of  a  disposition  to  evil.  No 
man  errs  in  sincere  opinion  against  his  judgment,  or 
sense  of  right.  In  practice  he  may  err  against  these, 
and  also  against  truth,  conscience,  reason.  The  er- 
rors of  the  honest  man's  opinions  arc  innocent,  but 
the  errors  of  the  wicked  man's  practice  are  criminal. 
By  your  principles  these  are  confounded.  This  is 
preposterous.  Wicked  deeds  claim  neither  charity, 
nor  love,  nor  sufferance.  Involuntary,  innocent  er- 
rors  arc  identified  with  the  imperfections  of  human 


LET.  II.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  113 

nature,  and  every  one's  own  frailty  should  convince 
him,  that  they  demand  the  kind  forbearance,  or  in 
other  words,  the  charity,  of  the  humble  and  the 
pious. 

It  may  be  added,  that  to  withhold  charity  from 
such  errors,  is  to  inflict  an  injury,  and  be  guilty  of  an 
offence.  What  more  can  you  do  to  injure  a  person, 
whose  faith  you  do  not  approve,  than  to  charge  peo- 
ple to  beware  of  his  discourse  and  his  society,  to  take 
care  how  they  read  his  books,  charging  him  with  he- 
resy, declaring  his  morals  to  be  infected  by  his  prin- 
ciples, and  pronouncing  him  unworthy  of  the  christian 
name  ?  In  such  a  case  you  evidently  make  opinion 
a  crime,  and  may  thus  fix  a  reproach  on  the  fairest 
character,  and  scatter  the  seeds  of  malevolence  in 
the  religious  affections  of  the  unwary  and  the  unin- 
formed. Such  insinuations  and  charges  are  worse 
than  open  slander,  and  public  defamation,  because 
they  go  abroad  under  the  protecting  garb  of  religion, 
and  plead  a  zeal  for  God,  even  amidst  their  greatest 
enormities.  They  are  fraught  with  mischief  in  eve- 
ry quarter.  They  testify  the  ill  temper  of  the  per- 
son by  whom  they  are  dispersed;  they  wantonly  im- 
pugn the  character  of  the  virtuous  and  sincere  ;  they 
deceive  and  corrupt  the  minds  of  the  unsuspecting, 
and  encourage  the  illiberal  in  their  bitterness  and 
unchristian  revilings. 

That  the  advocates  for  the  kind  of  christian  cha- 
rity, which  shows  itself  in  effects  like  these,  have  al^ 
ways  considered  opinion  a  crime,  has  been  thoroughly 
proved  by  the  conduct  of  churches.  Why  else  have 
15 


114  CHRISTIAJV  JVAME  AND  CHARITY.  [part  ii. 

they  so  often  brought  down  the  terrors  of  excommu- 
nication upon  some  of  their  members,  whose  Hves 
were  irreproachable,  but  whose  spirit  of  inquiry, 
and  honest  avowal  of  their  sentiments,  have  excited 
the  suspicion,  that  they  were  penetrating  too  deeply 
into  the  dark  subtleties,  and  secret  corners  of  some 
of  the  received  dogmas?  Why  the  anathemas 
which  different  churches  have  heaped  with  exhaust- 
less  bounty  on  others?  In  the  midst  of  these  imagi- 
nary works  of  sanctity  and  love,  where  is  that  charity, 
which  "  suffereth  long  and  is  kind,  which  doth  not 
behave  itself  unseemly,  seeketh  not  her  own,  is  not 
easily  provoked,  thinketh  no  evil,  rejoiceth  not  in  ini- 
quity, but  beareth  all  things,  and  endurcth  all 
things  ?"  She  has  fled  to  her  native  skies,  or  is  hidden 
in  the  depths  of  the  earth  ;  she  is  any  where,  rather 
than  in  the  bosoms  of  her  pretended  votaries,  inflam- 
ing their  mistaken  zeal,  and  approving  their  unholy 
purposes. 

Without  this  charity,  there  can  be  no  unity  of  con- 
sent, feeling,  or  action,  either  among  christian  sects 
or  individuals.  Differences  exist  in  matters  of  opin- 
ion  and  not  of  action.  No  sect,  I  believe,  has  ever 
made  any  peculiar  or  extraordinary  acts  of  holiness 
the  characteristics  of  its  party.  Hence,  upon  your 
scheme  of  loving  the  person,  but  "  reprobating  his 
principles,"  every  sect  must  reprobate  every  other, 
for  as  sects  they  differ  only  in  regard  to  ''  principles." 
This  remark  is  not  theoretical.  It  is  verified  by  the 
example  of  every  one,  who  betrays  a  fondness  for  de- 
nouncing any  sect.     The  Rev.  Dr.  Brett,  an  Episco- 


LET.  II.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  115 

palian,  in  a  laboured  discourse  to  establish  your  fa- 
vourite notion  of  exclusive  charity,  thinks  it  a  great 
hardship  indeed,  that  he  may  not  be  permitted,  in 
what  he  conceives  to  be  the  true  spirit  of  christian 
moderation,  to  condemn  Socinians  and  Quakers,  and 
"  those  who  refuse  baptism  to  infants,"  and  also  to 
call  such  persons  schismatics,  as  take  it  upon  them  to 
"  renounce  Episcopal  government,  and  contemn  the 
orders  and  services  of  our  church,  setting  up  for 
themselves  teachers  according  to  their  own  fancies, 
and  separating  themselves  from  our  communion,  as 
the  Presbyterians  and  Independents."*  And  I  sup- 
pose you  would  think  it  an  equal  hardship,  if  you 
were  denied  the  liberty  of  retorting  upon  Episcopa- 
lians thus  charitably  inclined,  and  of  clearing  yourself 
from  the  imputation  of  schism,  and  maintaining  that 
their  church  is  no  true  church,  but  a  defective  branch 
of  a  corrupt  stock,  "  setting  up  for  itself  teachers  ac- 
cording to  its  own  fancies,"  and  sadly  deforming  the 
primitive  faith  and  discipline.  This  you  would  no 
doubt  call  moderation  and  charity,  and  you  would 
only  be  following  the  example  of  Dr.  Brett,  and  eve- 
ry other  impugner  of  a  faith,  which  differs  from  his 
own. 

Trace  this  species  of  charity  through  its  Avindings, 
To  what  does  it  come  at  last  ?  It  terminates  in  dis- 
affections,  divisions,  wranglings,  and  all  the  desolating 
effects  of  the  unholy  passions.     Let  the  application  be 

*  Sermon  on  True    Moderation,    as  contained   in   tiie    Churchman  armed 
against  the  Errors  of  the  Times,  Vol.  iii.  p.  12. 


116  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  [part  ir. 

more  particular.  No  two  men  think  alike.  Opin- 
ions arc  as  various  as  the  objects  of  thought.  The 
whole  christian  workl  is  made  up  of  persons,  whose 
opinions  arc  tinged  with  every  shade,  from  the  bril- 
hant  hght  of  truth  to  the  blackest  darkness  of  error. 
What  individual  of  the  whole  number  can  have  the 
good  fortune  to  be  favoured  with  your  charity?  In 
accordance  with  your  notion,  the  exercise  of  this  vir- 
tue must  be  restricted  to  him  alone,  whose  opinions 
are  like  your  own.  But  where  shall  this  person  be 
found?  At  a  certain  point  your  charity  will  begin, 
but  where  is  this  point?  In  how  many  things  must 
there  be  an  agreement,  and  what  are  these  things? 
Till  this  be  fairly  established,  the  conclusion  of  the 
whole  matter  is,  you  can  have  no  charity  for  any  man 
but  yourself.  This  scheme  implies  an  unavailing  at- 
tempt to  force  nature.  When  you  can  make  all  the 
trees  of  the  forest  shoot  forth  leaves  of  the  same 
texture,  shape,  and  colour;  when  every  blossom  and 
every  spire  of  grass  shall  exactly  resemble  every  oth- 
er; wlien  every  man's  features,  form,  and  dimensions 
shall  be  alike  ;  and  all  minds  shall  have  the  same 
degree  of  wisdom,  intelligence,  and  strength,  then 
the  fond  dream  of  producing  uniformity  of  opinion 
will  be  realized,  and  then,  and  not  before,  some  strag- 
gling beams  of  your  charity  may  go  abroad,  to  look 
for  other  objects  than  yourself  to  act  upon.* 

*  Some  excellent  reflections  on  this  topic  may  be  seen  in  the  Rev.  Dr.  Chan^ 
ning's  "  Ri-marks  on  the  Rev.  Dr.  Worcester's  Second  Letter  to  him  on  Ameri- 
can Unitarianisin."     p.  24. 


lET.  II.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  117 

Universal  experience  has  also  taught  lessons,  which 
it  is  impossible  for  us  to  forget.  Persecutions,  pro- 
scriptions, wars,  murders,  have  been  the  bitter  and 
detestable  fruits  of  the  insane  zeal,  which  the  spirit 
of  uncharitableness,  not  as  exercised  towards  the 
'practices,  but  the  opinions  of  men,  has  kindled  and 
nourished  in  the  breasts  of  the  ignorant,  the  bigoted, 
the  ambitious,  the  hypocritical,  in  every  age  of  the 
christian  church.  Men  have  sanctified  the  most  in- 
famous purposes,  by  cloaking  their  crimes  under  the 
pretence  of  suppressing  heresy,  and  protecting  the 
faith.  There  is  not  a  deeper  blot  in  human  nature, 
nor  a  more  glaring  outrage  upon  reason,  nor  a  strong- 
er verification  of  the  maxim,  humanum  est  errare  et 
insanire,  than  the  treatment,  which  christians  have 
offered  to  one  another,  simply  because  they  could  not 
agree  in  opinion.  By  their  cruelties,  they  have  done 
as  much  as  the  power  of  man  could  do  to  exterminate 
one  half  of  the  world,  and  make  hypocrites  of  the 
other.  Do  you  suppose  the  number  of  heretics  in 
France,  and  of  Jews  in  Spain  and  Portugal,  was  di- 
minished by  the  barbarous  laws  made  against  them, 
and  by  the  bloody  orgies  of  the  Inquisition?  No. 
Hypocrites  were  multiplied,  every  wicked  passion 
was  fanned  into  a  flame,  and  the  prayers  of  the  suf- 
ferers ascended  to  heaven,  mingled  with  impreca- 
tions of  vengeance  on  their  relentless  persecutors. 

All  this  was  done,  let  it  be  remembered,  without 
sacrificing  a  particle  of  that  love,  which  you  describe 
as  the  essence  of  charity.  Nay,  so  far  from  it,  that  a 
love  for  the  souls  of  men  was  frequently  made  the  pri^ 


118  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  [part  n. 

mary  cause  of  the  vilest  persecutions.  This  was  love 
Avithout  charity,  and  these  were  its  genuine  fruits. 
T!ie  topic  of  persecution  is  too  trite  to  need  enlarge- 
ment. It  is  enough  for  you  to  cast  upon  it  a  single 
glance,  and  then  recollect,  that  the  principle  Avhich 
you  would  establish,  and  under  which  you  Avould 
shelter  your  charges  of  heresy  and  immorality  against 
Unitarians,  is  the  same,  which  has  ministered  to  the 
rage  of  fanaticism,  the  cupidity  of  avarice,  the  lust  of 
unprincipled  ambition,  and  the  tortures  of  cruelty 

These  hints  are  not  introduced  with  the  supposi- 
tion, that  such  abuses  are  any  longer  to  be  appre- 
hended, but  only  to  show  what  have  actually  been 
the  consequences  where  your  principle  has  operated 
to  its  fullest  extent.  Opinions,  and  not  actions,  have 
invariably  been  the  food  of  the  consuming  fire  of  per- 
secution. A  proper  charity  for  such  opinions,  would 
have  extinguished  the  devouring  flame,  spared  the 
lives  of  the  innocent,  and  raised  the  white  banner  of 
peace,  instead  of  the  bloody  flag  of  death  and  desola- 
tion. The  principle  will  for  ever  remain  the  same, 
and  be  equally  opposed  to  the  pure  spirit  of  Chris- 
tianity. It  may  stop  short  of  actual  persecution,  not 
for  the  want  of  a  latent  disposition,  but  of  power,  and 
the  approbation  of  public  sentiment. 

The  days  of  persecution  with  fire  and  sword,  it  is  to 
be  hoped,  and  perhaps  believed,  have  run  their  course. 
They  have  settled  into  the  abyss  of  time,  and  will 
never  again  be  drawn  out  to  darken  and  disgrace  the 
history  of  human  nature.  The  hideous  spirit  of  those 
days,   whose  poisonous  breath  infected  all    that  was 


t.KT.  II.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  119 

pure  in  the  human  heart,  and  blasted  all  that  was 
fair  and  lovely  in  the  christian  scheme,  is  powerless, 
subdued  by  the  majesty  of  truth,  and  the  rising 
strength  of  unperverted  reason.  Heaven  has  smiled 
on  the  land,  and  the  chimeras,  which  so  long  brooded 
in  the  imagination,  and  settled  upon  the  soul,  have 
gradually  dissolved  and  disappeared.  If  some  traces 
of  them  still  remain,  they  are  like  the  inscriptions  on 
the  mouldering  monuments  of  antiquity,  losing  some- 
thing of  their  distinctness  and  form  with  the  return 
of  every  sun.  The  finger  of  time  will  at  length  erase 
them,  and  leave  a  fair  surface,  on  which  shall  be 
written,  in  characters  that  can  never  be  defaced,  the 
motto  of  all  succeeding  ages — truth  and  christian  cha- 
rity. 

Again,  your  view  of  charity  is  at  variance  with  the 
positive  precepts  of  the  Saviour.  "  Judge  not,  that 
ye  be  not  judged,"  is  an  imperious  command^  and  is 
enforced  by  the  beautiful  illustration,  which  immedi- 
ately follows  it,  respecting  the  mote  in  a  brother's 
eye.  Now,  this  command  could  not  relate  to  con- 
duct. Every  one  has  a  right,  and  ought  to  judge 
the  wicked  deeds  even  of  a  brother.  It  relates  to 
motives,  intentions,  and  thoughts  in  forming  opinions. 
These  we  are  not  at  liberty  to  judge,  or  censure,  for 
a  very  plain  reason,  because  they  are  beyond  our 
reach.  And  we  encroach  upon  a  prerogative,  which 
God  only  can  claim,  when  we  set  up  a  tribunal  to 
take  cognizance  of  the  consciences  of  men.  It  is  a 
fact,  which  ought  to  be  impressed  on  the  minds,  and 
ensraven  in  the  hearts   of  all  those  worthy  christians. 

•3 


120  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITV.  [part  11. 

who  are  fond  of  placing  themselves  In  the  judgment 
seat  of  such  a  tribunal,  that  Jesus  neither  condemned, 
censured,  nor  judged  any  man  for  his  errors. 

The  severe  denunciations,  which  he  uttered  against 
the  Pharisees,  were  directed  in  no  case  against  their 
opinions,  but  their  hypocrisy,  and  wicked  conduct. 
The  heresies  of  the  Sadducees,  and  the  miserable  su- 
perstitions of  the  Pharisees,  drew  from  him  no  ex- 
pressions of  reproach,  nor  kindled  a  spirit  of  exclu- 
sion. He  worshipped  in  their  synagogues,  and  asso- 
ciated freely  and  cordially  with  all  good  men.  He 
never  even  rebuked  his  disciples  for  their  errors  of 
opinion,  although  some  of  them  were  of  no  favoura- 
ble tendency.  If  he  told  them  of  the  weakness  of 
their  faith,  as  he  occasionally  did,  it  was  with  a  gen- 
tleness consistent  with  his  knowledge  of  their  since- 
rity, and  a  proper  sense  of  their  imperfection.  He 
did  not  try  their  feelings,  nor  abuse  their  integrity  to 
themselves  and  their  God,  by  dogmatical  assertions, 
harsh  epithets,  and  opprobrious  names.  He  did  not 
seek  to  alienate  from  them  the  aifections  of  their 
brethren,  nor  to  excite  the  suspicions  of  the  indiffer- 
ent, by  proclaiming  in  the  cars  of  the  world  their 
"  dreadful,  soul  destroying  errors  ;"  nor  by  calling 
them  enemies  of  the  Gospel,  who  denied  their  Lord, 
and  whom  it  was  sinful  to  bid  God  speed  ;  nor  by 
charging  them  with  embracing  a  system,  which  was 
"  most  acceptable  to  the  Avorldly  minded  and  li- 
centious," and  by  which  they  were  "  not  in  the 
smallest  degree  sanctitied."  No  language  of  this  tex- 
ture can  be  found  in  the  discourses  of  our  divine  Mas- 


t.ET.  II.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  V2\ 

ter.  We  are  indebted  for  it  to  the  spirit  of  his  fol- 
lowers in  later  times.* 

Another  evil  consequence  of  your  view  of  charity, 
is  the  discouragement  of  religious  inquiry.  Nor  is 
this  of  small  magnitude.  Till  we  think  it  indifferent 
whether  we  have  truth  or  falsehood,  inquiry  in  reli- 
gion is  a  duty  of  the  highest  obligation.  Truth 
yields  only  to  inquiry,  and  there  can  be  no  progress 
in  truth,  while  the  freedom  of  investigation  is  re- 
strained. But  the  man,  who  thinks  it  a  deed  of  cha- 
rity to  deprecate  the  faith  of  another  man,  and  to 
impress  the  stigma  of  immorality  on  his  character  as 
a  necessary  accompaniment  of  his  faith,  must  have 
so  unshaken  a  conviction  of  his  own  infallibility,  as  not 
to  suffer  himself  to  examine  one  step  beyond  his  pre- 
sent acquisitions.  Let  all  men  have  the  same  confi- 
dence, self  estimation  and  charitable  turn,  and  of 
course  each  one  would  think  it  a  duty  to  adhere  to 
his  own  faith,  aud  deprecate  the  faith  of  all  others. 
When  charity  to  others  requires  us  to  judge  their 
opinions,  charity  to  ourselves  would  forbid  any  scru- 
tiny into  our  own. 

If  any  one  can  get  up  the  cry  of  heresy  against  a 
particular  tenet,  all,  who  regard  his  authority,  and 
value  his  reputation,  and  do  not  profess  to  be  well  in- 
formed on  the  subject,  will  take  care  to  support  him, 
repeat  his  cry,  and  reiterate  his  alarms.     To  inquire 

*  A  large  portion  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  is  a  comment  on  that  kind  of 
charity,  which  you  call  a  «'  popular  crudity."  Jeremy  Taylor's  Eleventh 
Discourse  in  his  Life  of  Christ  is  on  Charity,  as  taught  in  this  sermon.  Hf 
.'onsiders  it  under  three  heads ;  FoRCiviNfi,  Giving,  Not  Judging. 

16 


122  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  [part  u 

afterwards  would  be  to  reproach  themselves  for 
their  precipitancy  and  want  of  discernment.  Hence, 
the  man  of  charity  not  only  shuts  his  own  ears  to  all 
new  counsel,  and  his  understanding  to  all  further 
wisdom,  but  throws  the  mantle  of  ignorance  over  as 
many  as  come  within  his  reach. 

On  looking  back  to  the  view,  which  has  been  tak- 
en, it  will  be  perceived,  that  so  far  from  charity  hav- 
ing nothing  to  do  with  opinions,  it  is  really  and  j)ro- 
perly  confined  to  these  alone.  We  ought  not  to  be 
charitable  to  wicked  deeds,  and  good  ones  do  not 
need  in  their  behalf  the  exercise  of  this  virtue. 
Opinions  are  involuntary.  It  would  be  a  crime  for  a 
man  to  pretend  to  believe  contrary  to  his  actual  con- 
viction;  and  whoever  requires  a  particular  faith,  be- 
fore he  will  let  his  charity  appear,  is  in  some  degree 
accessary  to  such  a  crime. 

It  remains  only  to  notice  two  or  three  texts  of 
Scripture,  which  you  have  quoted  to  fortify  your  sen- 
timents, and  in  justification  of  your  charges.  The 
first  is  that,  which  contains  the  denunciation  of  our 
Saviour  against  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees.  "  Ye 
serpents,  ye  generation  of  vipers,  how  can  ye  escape 
the  damnation  of  hell  ?"  Matth.  xxiii.  33.  In  pro- 
nouncing this  sentence,  if  the  common  notion  of  chari- 
ty be  correct,  you  observe,  '•'  our  blessed  Saviour 
most  grievously  offended  against  this  duty."  Had  you 
attended  to  the  whole  chapter  preceding,  you  could 
never  have  fallen  into  so  great  a  mistake,  as  to  quote 
this  passage  in  your  vindication.  It  has  not  the  re- 
motest bearing  on   the   opinions  of  the  Scribes  and 


LET.  ii.J  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  123 

Pharisees,  but  is  pointedly  aimed  at  their  conduct. 
It  was  uttered  immediately  after  enumerating  their 
vices,  and  charging  them  with  hypocrisy,  with  mak- 
ing long  j)rayers  for  a  pretence,  deceiving  the  unwa- 
ry, neglecting  judgment,  mercy,  and  faith,  and  being 
guilty  of  extortion,  excess,  iniquity.  In  this  connex- 
ion, the  text  is  in  no  respect  to  your  purpose,  and 
might  be  spoken  by  any  person  against  others,  whose 
conduct  resembled  that  of  the  Pharisees,  without 
encroaching  on  the  charity,  for  which  I  have  been 
contending.* 

You  next  bring  to  your   aid  the  following  passage. 
"  He  that  abideth  not  in  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  hath 


*  The  use  made  of  the  above  quotation  from  the  words  of  the  Saviour,  re- 
ininds  one  of  the  language  of  Archdeacon  Philpot,  who,  in  the  reign  of  queen 
Mary,  suffered  martyrdom  for  his  opinions.  Among  his  companions  in  prison 
were  certain  Arians,  wiiora  he  was  accused  of  treating  rudely  and  with  abuse. 
He  wrote  in  his  defence  what  he  called,  jln  Apology  of  John  Philpot,  vrittcn 
for  spitting  vpon  an  Arian ;  with  an  invective  against  the  Arians,  the  very 
natural  children  of  Antichrist. 

After  expressing  his  abhorrence  of  the  opinions  entertained  by  "  an  arrogant, 
ignorant  and  obstinately  blinded  Arian,"  he  goes  on  to  ask  ;  "  Cannot  you  bear 
with  me,  if,  after  all  this,  I  did  spit  on  him  ;  partly  as  a  declaration  of  that 
sorrow,  which  I  had  to  hear  such  a  proud  blasphemer  of  our  Saviour,  and  also 
to  signify  unto  others  there  present,  whom  he  went  about  to  pervert,  that  he 
was  a  person  to  be  abhorred  of  all  christians,  and  not  to  be  companied  withal? 
If  this  my  fact  seem  to  them,  that  judge  not  all  things  according  to  the  Spirit  of 
God,  uncharitable,  yet  let  them  know,  that  God,  who  is  charity,  allovveth  the 
same.  For  it  is  written  in  the  Gospel,  that  Christ  rame  not  to  set  us  at  peace 
■with  men  in  the  earth,  but  at  dirision  ;  and  that  is  for  his  cause  and  truth. 
And  whosoever  will  not  abide  with  Christ's  church  in  the  truth,  we  ought  not 
to  show  the  points  of  charity  unto  any  such,  but  to  take  him  as  a  heathen  and 
a  publican." 

Here  we  find  this  worthy  apologist,  who  suffered  martyrdom  for  his  own 
opinions,  deiending  his  harsh  conduct  towaids  those  who  rliffered  from  him, 
but  who  were  equally  persecuted,  by  quoting  the  example  of  the  Saviour ;  or 
rather  by  a  forced  and  perverted  interpretation  of  Scripture  language.  Who- 
fiver  would  bend  the  words  or  the  example  of  Christ  to  sanction  uncharitable 


124  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  [i-art  u. 

not  God;  he  that  abldelh  in  the  doctrine  of  Christ, 
he  hatli  both  the  Father  and  the  Son.  4f  there 
come  any  unto  you  and  bring  not  this  doctrine,  receive 
him  not  into  your  house,  neither  bid  him  God  speed. 
For  he  that  biddeth  him  God  speed,  is  partaker  of 
his  evil  deeds."  2  John,  9,  10,  11.  Here,  again, 
you  have  run  into  the  same  mistake  as  above.  The 
Apostle  is  not  reproving  errors^  but  vices.  The  men 
of  whom  he  is  speaking,  he  tells  us  were  "  deceiv- 
ers." This  shows  them  not  to  have  been  condemned 
for  being  led  away  by  their  erroneous  opinions,  but 
for  attempting  to  impose  on  others,  what  they  knew 
to  be  false.  They  taught  false  doctrines  knowingly, 
and  for  selfish  and  wicked  purposes.  The  Apostle 
considered  them  transgressors,  as  is  manifest, from  a 
clause,  which,  for  some  reason,  you  omitted  in 
your  quotation.  "  Whosoever  transgresseth,  and 
abideth  not  in  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  hath  not  God." 
It  is  moreover  expressed  in  positive  terms,  that  their 
"cuzV  deeds"  were  the  objects  of  this  reprobation. 
To  teach  what  they  knew  was  false,  with  the  inten- 
tion of  leading  people  into  wicked  practices,  was  nei- 
ther a  mistake  of  judgment,  nor  error  of  opinion,  but 


uess  on  account  of  honpst  difference  of  opinion,  must  do  it  by  an  interpretation 
equally  forceil  and  perverted.  See  Strype's  Historical  Memorials,  Vol.  U, 
Appendix  p.  145  ;  as  quotod  in  Lindsey's  Historical  Viciv,  p.  96. 

When  the  Sadducees,  who  denied  the  resurrection,  attempted  to  embarrass 
our  Saviour  with  a  subtle  question,  he  did  not  condemn  them  at  once  as  here- 
tics, and  infidels,  but  mildly  replied,  "  Ye  do  err,  not  knowing  the  Scriptures, 
nor  the  power  of  God,"  and  then  went  on  in  a  gentle  manner  lo  point  out  and 
roircft  their  misfake.     Mntth.  xxii.29. 


LKT.  II.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  125 

a  deliberate  crime.     To  such  persons  no  laws  of  chari- 
ty afford  a  refuge.* 

You  have  at  least  the  encouragement  of  not  being 
solitary  in  your  application  of  this  passage.  It  is 
often  in  the  mouths  of  the  orthodox  of  the  present 
day.  They  have  acquired  a  habit,  or  set  up  a  fa- 
shion of  calling  every  thing  heresy,  which  deviates 
from  the  train  of  thought  into  which  their  minds 
have  chanced  to  run,  and  to  such  persons  as  cannot 
force  themselves  into  this  track,  however  sincere  and 
honest,  however  virtuous  and  heavenly  minded,  they 
seem  to  regard  it  the  highest  test  of  their  piety,  and 
zeal  for  the  cause  of  God,  to  deny  the  christian  ci- 
vilities; and  they  make  all  smooth  and  quiet  with 
their  consciences  by  shielding  themselves  under  the 
example  of  St.  John,  who  cautioned  the  christians  of 
his  time,  or  rather  the  "  elect  lady,  and  her  chil- 
dren," to  whom  he  wrote  his  second  epistle,  not  to 
associate  with  deceivers,  transgressors,  and  evil  doers. 
Such  is  the  power  of  orthodoxy  to  blind  the  eyes, 
cloud  the  understanding,  narrow  the  mind,  shut  up 
the   heart,  and  freeze   the  affections.     Else  why  is 


*  Whitby  says  of  the  phrase,  Bid  him  not  God  speed,  that  "  it  seems  to  be 
taken  from  the  Jews,  who  were  forbid  to  say  God  speed,  to  a  man  that  was 
excommunicated,  or  was  doing  any  6iil  action.''^  And  in  the  present  instance 
he  adds,  that  it  enjoins  "  a  prohibition  from  doing  any  thing,  which  imports  a 
consent  to,  or  approbation  of  the  evil  actions"  of  one,  to  whom  it  may  be  ap- 
plied. Paraphrase  on  John  2,  11.  See,  also,  Whitby's  Discourses,  added  to 
his  Last  Thoughts,  second  edition,  p.  156. 

Le  Clerc  remarks  on  the  passage,  that  the  persons  alluded  to  were  wicked 
men,  who  wished  to  be  thought  religious,  but  who  rejected  the  authority  of 
Christ  and  the  apostles.  No  such,  he  continues,  are  found  among  christians 
of  the  present  day,  for  they  all  revere  the  authority  of  the  apostles,  however 
they  may  depart  from  their  doctrines.  Signantur  mali  homines,  qui  pii  videri 
volebant,  etc.     Vid.  Cleri,  Adnotat.  in  Lac. 


126  CFIRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  [fart  u. 

this  passage,  and  others  like  it,  so  often  perverted  to 
give  countenance  to  the  unchristian  spirit,  and  unholy 
practices,  which  some,  who  profess  to  take  their  re- 
hgion  from  the  Bible,  exhibit  towards  others,  who 
are  in  no  degree  behind  them  in  their  earnest  inqui- 
ries after  truth,  their  humble  and  zealous  efforts  to 
obtain  holiness  of  life,  their  confidence  in  the  doc- 
trines and  promises  of  Christ,  and  their  serious  con- 
cern for  their  eternal  welfare? 

Your  last  quotation  is  from  St.  PauPs  epistle  to  the 
Galatians.  "  If  any  man  preach  any  other  gospel  un- 
to you,  than  that  ye  have  received,  let  him  be  ac- 
cursed."* This  text  was  directed  againt  a  particu- 
lar class  of  persons,  who,  the  apostle  observes  in 
the  same  connexion,  "  would  pervert  the  Gospel  of 
Christ."  These  persons,  we  learn  from  the  whole 
epistie  to  the  Galatians,  were  Judaizing  christians, 
who  were  not  simply  betrayed  into  mistakes  respect- 
ing the  Christian  faith,  but  desired  to  impose  the 
the  laws  of  Moses  on  all  the  converts,  and  to  keep 
up  the  distinctions,  which  had  always  existed  be- 
tween the  Jews  and  Gentiles.  They  knew  this  Avas 
contrary  to  the  truth  and  spirit  of  Christianity,  be- 
cause an  inspired  Apostle  had  told  them  so,  yet  their 
pride  and  overbearing  temper  carried  them  forward 
in  deiiance  of  conscience  and  a  better  knowledge. 
In  short,  their  wicked  propensities,  and  obstinate  diso- 
bedience of  the  plain,  practical  rules  of  the  religion 
thoy  professed,  and  not  the  errors  of  their  belief 
drew  down  upon  them  the  severe  censure  in  the  text 

*  Calatiaiib  i.  9. 


LET.  II.]  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  127 

The  Apostle  uses  bold  and  confident  language,  and 
he  gives  a  good  reason.  He  was  "  taught  by  the 
revelation  of  Jesus  Christ."  When  Calvinists  can 
prove  the  same  in  regard  to  themselves,  it  will  be- 
come them  to  be  equally  confident,  and  I  apprehend 
little  hazard  in  predicting,  that  every  Unitarian  will 
then  humbly  submit  to  their  authority. 

Such  are  the  proofs  you  bring  from  Scripture, 
that  in  the  charges  of  heresy,  and  of  immorality  as 
the  consequence  of  dangerous  opinions,  you  were  only 
acting  "  in  conformity  with  the  example,  both  of  the 
Master,  and  his  inspired  servants."  What  I  have 
said  is  enough  to  show  how  far  this  example  bears 
you  out.  I  cannot  close,  however,  without  express- 
ing my  astonishment  at  the  position  assumed  in  re- 
sorting to  this  argument  of  defence.  Is  it  possible, 
that  any  persons  of  the  present  day,  really  suppose 
themselves  to  have  the  same  authority  to  judge  and 
condemn  the  faith  of  others,  as  the  Saviour  and  his 
Apostles  ?  This  must  be  taken  for  granted  by  all 
who  can  imagine  that  an  appeal  to  their  example 
would  have  any  validity.  This  error  runs  through 
all  your  remarks.  Positions  are  laid  down  in  the 
most  absolute  manner.  If  you  knew  the  hearts  of 
men,  like  the  Saviour,  or  were  made  acquainted  with 
all  divine  truth,  like  the  Apostle  Paul,  such  a  thing- 
would  appear  less  strange.  No  knowledge  short  of 
this  could  qualify  any  one  to  follow  their  example  in 
the  instances,  which  you  propose  ;  and  even  then  no 
example  could  be  found  for  judging  the  errors  of  meR 
as  crimes. 


128  CHRISTIAN  NAME  AND  CHARITY.  [part  ik 

Unitarians  consider  charity  an  essential  part  of  re- 
ligion. They  delight  to  think  well  of  all  men,  who 
give  the  Scripture  test  of  a  holy  and  blameless  life. 
Articles  of  belief  may  exhibit  themselves  in  an  infinite 
variety  of  forms.  They  may  deceive  and  mislead. 
Treachery  may  be  concealed  under  fair  pretences, 
falsehood  may  be  entwined  with  the  most  solemn 
protestations,  and  deeds  of  the  blackest  die  may  lurk 
in  the  folds  of  a  capacious  faith.  Holiness  is  single, 
always  the  same,  and  always  to  be  seen.  Unitarians 
make  this  the  criterion  of  a  truly  religious  character. 
They  are  told,  that  "  without  holiness  no  man  shall 
see  the  Lord,"  but  they  are  not  told,  that  they  must 
suffer  this  penalty,  unless  they  believe  in  a  particu- 
lar dogma,  which  they  cannot  understand,  but  which 
the  fond  partiality  of  some  devotee  may  desire  to 
impose  on  them. 

While  they  pray  to  have  their  minds  enlightened, 
and  humbly  submit  to  the  guiding  counsels  of  the 
Almighty,  they  feel  secure  in  his  kind  protection^ 
and  do  not  fear,  that  he  will  make  their  humility  and 
confidence  the  instruments  of  their  ruin.  They  have 
charity  for  all  christians,  who  show  themselves  sin- 
cere, and  whose  religion  shines  out  in  the  brightness 
of  a  good  life.  Piety  and  virtue  are  with  them  the 
convincing  test  of  a  saving  faith,  and  those  articles  of 
belief,  which  produce  these  in  the  highest  degree, 
and  to  the  greatest  extent,  will  have  the  largest  por- 
tion of  their  ciiarity.  Whoever  thinks  this  an  evi- 
dence of  the  defective  faith,  and  the  immorality  of 
Unitarians,  must  be  left  to  enjoy  his  opinion. 


PART  III. 


TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT. 


LETTER  I. 

Various  Opinions  concerning  the  Trinity. 

SIR, 

As  the  doctrines  of  Trlnltj  and  Atonement  are  con- 
sidered of  so  much  importance  by  their  advocates, 
and  as  Unitarians  and  Calvinists  are  supposed  to  dif- 
fer more  widely  on  these  doctrines,  than  on  most 
others,  I  shall  no  doubt  be  pardoned,  if  I  beg  your 
attention  to  a  somewhat  extended  view  of  them. 
Not  that  I  shall  touch  on  the  arguments  by  which 
they  are  believed  to  be  supported,  or  advance  any 
direct  proofs  of  their  falsehood.  My  inquiries  will 
be  turned  to  the  meaning  and  nature  of  these  doc- 
trines, to  their  value  as  simple  articles  of  faith,  to 
their  authority  as  supposed  plain  truths  of  Scripture, 
and  especially  to  their  influence  as  instruments  of 
practical  piety  and  goodness. 
17 


130  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  nf, 

We  are  perpetually  told,  that  the  trinity  and 
atonement  are  the  essence  of  all  true  Christianity,  that 
without  a  firm  faith  in  them  no  one  has  the  least 
claims  even  to  the  name  of  christian,  nor  any  well 
grounded  hope  of  the  mercy  of  God,  and  the  rewards 
of  salvation.  To  deny  the  trinity  and  atonement  is 
represented  to  be  the  same  thing  as  to  deny  the  Sa- 
viour himself,  to  reject  the  Gospel,  to  renounce  the 
authority  of  divine  revelation,  to  cast  off  the  laws  of 
God,  to  be  a  heretic,  infidel,  deist,  atheist,  anything, 
in  fact,  but  a  good  man,  and  a  sincere  inquirer  after 
truth.  If  a  denial  of  these  doctrines  be  fraught  with 
consequences  so  alarming,  it  must  be  an  object  of  the 
very  first  magnitude  to  ascertain  what  the  doctrines 
themselves  are.  It  is  impossible,  that  any  articles  of 
faith  should  have  such  power  over  the  character  and 
destiny  of  meix  unless  they  are  truths  of  the  most 
obvious  and  positive  kind,  approving  themselves  in- 
stantly to  the  understanding,  and  written  with  beams 
of  heavenly  light  on  every  page  of  the  Gospel. 

At  all  events,  it  would  seem  absolutely  necessary, 
that  they,  who  profess  to  have  the  true  and  saving 
faith,  should  agree  in  reporting  and  explaining  what 
they  believe.  If  any  faith  in  a  trinity  be  essential  to 
salvation,  must  not  this  faith  be  the  same  in  all  ?  In 
the  nature  of  things  there  can  be  only  one  true  faith, 
and  if  there  be  not  an  agreement,  how  is  it  known 
that  any  person  has  this  true  laith?  Or,  in  other 
words,  how  is  it  known,  that  any  one  has  the  faith 
by  which  he  may  hope  to  be  saved  ?  If  a  hundred 
persons  have  each  a  separate  opinion,  which  they  re- 


LET.  I.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  131 

spectlvely  call  the  trinity,  it  is  evident,  that  only  one 
opinion  out  of  the  hundred  can  be  true,  and  even  this 
may  be  false.  Are  all  these  persons  orthodox,  and 
blessed  wiih  a  saving  faith,  because  they  embrace  a 
set  of  notions,  in  many  respects  contradictory,  to 
which  they  give  the  name  of  trinity?  If  not,  who 
out  of  the  hundred  is  truly  orthodox ;  who  has  the 
fundamental  doctrine  ;  who  is  in  the  way  of  salva- 
tion? 

A  proper  method  of  testing  the  accuracy  of  the 
assumption,  which  has  been  made  with  so  much  con- 
fidence, respecting  the  value  of  the  doctrines  named 
trinity  and  atonement,  as  articles  of  faith,  is  to  ascer- 
tain the  fact,  whether  the  persons  themselves,  ^vho 
have  been  most  zealous  in  believing  and  defend- 
ing them,  have  harmonized  in  thesr  belief.  If  it 
shall  appear,  that  the  same  thing,  which  one  calls  a 
trinity,  or  atonement,  is  the  trinity,  or  atonement  of 
all  the  rest,  I  allow,  that  it  will  make  an  argument 
strongly  in  favour  of  the  assumption.  But  if,  on  the 
contrary,  it  shall  turn  out,  that  there  are  no  uniform 
and  fixed  principles  by  which  the  professed  believers 
of  these  doctrines  are  guided,  that  they  break  into 
parties  and  form  systems  radically  different  from  each 
other,  and  that  no  two  persons  will  agree  in  defining 
their  own  conceptions,  it  will  follow,  that  no  such  im- 
portance as  has  been  pretended  can  be  attached  to  a 
faith  in  certain  dogmas,  to  which  any  one  may  at 
pleasure  give  the  names  of  trinity  and  atonement. 
Whether  the  dogmas  themselves  are  true  or  false, 
the  consequence  will  be  the  same,  and    will  prove. 


132  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [paht  m. 

that  the  importance  witli  which  some  persons  would 
clothe  a  mere  faith  in  them  is  imaginary. 

Let  us  proceed  to  this  inquiry,  and,  in  the  present 
letter,  employ  ourselves  with  the  question.  What  is 
the  trinity?  What  are  the  conceptions,  or  ideas 
citlier  separately  or  combined,  which  form  the  ob- 
ject of  faith,  to  which  this  appellation  has  been 
given?  For  the  sake  of  form,  this  question  may  be 
asked,  but  no  one,  who  has  attended  to  the  subject, 
will  flatter  himself  that  it  can  be  answered.  To 
bring  together  a  small  number  of  the  leading  opinions 
of  those  professing  themselves  Trinitarians,  is  all  that 
will  be  attempted.  It  would  be  no  diflicult  matter, 
perhaps,  to  determine  in  some  general  sense  how 
the  trinity  is  set  forth  in  particular  creeds,  and  the 
notions  of  individuals  ;  but  to  find  out  any  thing  like 
a  system  in  which  all  Trinitarians  would  unite,  or  to 
enumerate  the  parties  into  which  the  advocates  of  this 
doctrine  liave  been  divided,  from  its  origin  to  the 
present  day,  and  the  opposing  schemes  invented  to 
bring  it  within  the  compass  of  the  human  faculties, 
would  be  as  impobsible  in  itself,  as  fruitless  in  the  at- 
tempt. 

Trinitarians  themselves  have  not  yet  approached 
so  near  to  a  similarity  of  views,  as  to  agree  in  a  defi- 
nition, notwithstanding  many  of  them  profess  to  re- 
gard faith  in  this  undefinable  doctrine  as  absolutely 
Qssential  to  salvation.  One  of  the  heaviest  censures 
alTected  to  be  passed  by  the  orthodox  on  Unitarians, 
is,  thai  thoy  do  not  agree  in  explaining  their  own 
opinions,     jjcfore  this  j)()int  is  insisted  on  any  further, 


LET.  I.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  133 

we  should  be  sflad  if  Trinitarians  would  unite  in  some 
common  explanation  of  the  doctrine,  which  they  pro- 
fess to  think  the  most  important  in  religion;  or,  at 
least,  show  some  good  reason  why  we  are  to  reve- 
rence as  a  funda  iiental  article  of  faith,  a  doctrine, 
which  cannot  be  defined  in  Scripture  language,  and 
which  is  confessed  to  be  unintelligible  and  inexplica- 
ble. The  truth  is,  that  no  plan  has  been  devised, 
which  was  not  encumbered  with  so  many  insur- 
mountable difficulties,  that  few  minds  could  be  in- 
duced to  receive  it  in  that  shape.  Hence,  plans 
have  been  multiplied,  the  powers  of  invention  and 
combination  have  been  put  in  requisition,  till  the  the- 
ories of  the  trinity  have  become  as  numerous  as  the 
writers  by  whom  it  has  been  attempted  to  be  ex- 
plained. 

Bishop  Stillingfleet  speaks  of  five  difTerent  trini- 
ties, radically  distinct  from  each  other,  which  the 
opposers  of  that  doctrine  had  detected  in  the  writ- 
ings of  its  defenders.  First,  the  Ciceronian  trinity, 
which  represents  the  three  persons,  as  three  rela- 
tions of  God  to  his  creatures ;  secondly^  the  Cartesian 
trinity,  in  which  the  three  persons  are  three  infinite 
minds;  thirdly,  the  Platonic  trinity,  which  consists  of 
three  coeternal  beings,  two  of  Avhich  are  subordinate 
to  the  other ;  fourthly,  the  Aristotelian  trinity,  in 
which  the  three  persons  are  one  numerical  substance  ; 
fifthly,  the  mystical  trinity,  which  no  conscientious 
believer  should  presume  to  explain.*  Another  writer 
has  discovered  forty  particulars  in  which  Trinitarians 

*  Stillingfleet's  Vindication  of  the  Trinity,  Picf.  p.  5. 


134  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  lu. 

are  at  variance  among  themselves  in  their  sense  of 
this  doctrine.*  Had  he  chosen  to  take  the  trouble, 
he  might  have  found  forty  more. 

Some  of  the  wiser  sort  of  divines  have  been  more 
cautious  how  tliey  committed  themselves.  They 
have  taken  care  to  talk  in  such  a  way,  as  either  to 
mean  nothing  at  all,  or  any  thing,  which  should  suit 
the  taste  and  fancy  of  their  readers.  Instead  of  de- 
fining, or  explaining,  they  tell  us  of  three  differences, 
or  diversities,  or  subsistences,  or  properties,  or  some- 
whats  ;  of  three  internal  relations,  or  external  rela- 
tions, or  modes  of  existence  ;  of  any  thing,  indeed,  but 
plain  rational  facts  from  which  you  can  gain  a  single 
idea,  or  form  a  single  conception. 

As  an  example,  sufter  me  to  quote  a  paragraph 
from  Cheynel's  Book  of  the  Divine  Trinity. 

"  We  may  best  resemble  all  that  difference,"  says 
Cheynel,  "  which  is  between  the  essence  of  God,  and 
the  divine  subsistences,  by  considering  the  transcen- 
dent afTections  of  ens  simpliciter,  and  the  attributes  of 
God;  who  doth  inlinitcly  transcend,  not  only  a  pre- 
dicamental  substance,  but  a  metaphysical  entity  ;  as 
the  most  metaphysical  men,  who  are  sound  in  the 
faith,  do  honestly  confess.  Concerning  the  transcen- 
dental alFections  of  ens,  which  are  imum  verum  bonnm, 
we  say,  these  three  affections,  and  ens  in  latitudine» 
do  not  make  four  things  really  distinct ;  and  yet  we 
say,  they  are  real  and  positive  affections."t 

*  Ben  Mortlecai's  Apology,  Vol.  I,  p.  84,  213. 

t  Note?  and  Illiistiations  to  Ben  Mordecai's  First  Letter,  p.  154. 

"St.  Austin  being  asked  what  the  three  are,  says  ;  human  learning  is  scanty. 


i,i-.T.  i.j  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  135 

This,  in  the  language  of  the  learned  HenryTaylor, 
is  called  explaining  ;  and  it  is  just  as  clear  as  the  ex- 
planations, with  which  other  divines  have  darkened 
this  subject,  although  they  may  have  been  less  skilful 
than  Cheynel  in  using  the  dialectical  weapons  of  the 
schoolmen.  Witness  an  elaborate  volume  recently 
published  by  a  professor  of  oriental  languages  in  the 
College  of  Aberdeen,  in  which  the  acute  professor 
attempts  to  prove  the  doctrine  of  the  trinity  by 
"  Reason  and  Demonstration  founded  on  Duration 
and  Space."  Witness  Sherlock's  Vindication,  by  the 
reading  of  which  Emlyn  and  Manning  were  driven  to 
be  Unitarians,  They  were  tempted  to  suspect,  that 
a  doctrine  which  the  ability  of  such  a  man  succeed- 
ed so  imperfectly  in  explaining,  and  so  poorly  in  vin- 
dicating, must  have  something  defective  in  itself. 
Witness  the  writings  of  Barrow,  South,  and  Water- 
land,  and  behold  men  of  great  genius  and  learning 
uttering  themselves  on  the  trinity  in  phrases  of  such 
unmeaning  import,  as  they  never  would  have  ventur- 
ed on  any  other  subject  of  the  most  trivial  kind.  Look 
where  you  will,  and  it  will  invariably  be  found,  thai 
the  more  the  defenders  of  this  doctrine  say  about  it, 
the  less  intelligible  they  become,  and  the  farther 
they  recede  from  the  principles  of  common  sense. 

The  following  is  a  classification  of  the  opinions, 
which  have  been  entertained  concerning  the  trinity 
by  some  of  the  most  eminent  English  divines. 

and  affords  not  terms  to  express  it ;  "tis  therefore  answered,  three  persons,  not 
as  if  that  was  to  the  purpose  ;  but  somewhat  must  be  said,  and  we  must  not  be 
silent."  Ibid.  155.     JJusl.  de  Tnn.  LV.  c.  9. 


136  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [PAnr  ni 

"  First,  the  Athanasians,   among  whom  were  Dr. 
Waterland,  and  probably  ArchbishojD  Seeker,  from 
the  encomium  he   passes  on  the  Athanasian  Creed, 
maintained,  that  the  trinity  consists  of  three  distinct, 
independent,  and  equal  persons,  constituting  one  and 
the  same  God  ;  or  in  other  words,  that  the  '  Father 
is  Almighty,  the  Son  is  Almighty,  the  Holy  Ghost    is 
Almighty;  and  yet  there  are  not  three  Almighties, 
but  one    Almighty.'*      Secondly,    according   to    Mr. 
Howe's  theory,  there   are  three,  distinct,  intelligent 
hypostases,  each  having  a  distinct^  intelligent  nature, 
united  in  some  inexplicable  manner,  so  as  to  make  one 
God,  in  somewhat  the  same  way  as  the   corporeal, 
sensitive,  and  intellectual  faculties  are  united  to  form 
one  man.      IJiirdly,  Dr.   Wallis  was  an  advocate  for 
the  Sabellian  hypothesis  ;  and  held  that  the  three  per- 
sons in  the  trinity  were  only  three  modes,  or  relations, 
which  the   Deity  bears  to  his  creatures.     This   also 
was  probably  the  opinion  of  Archbishop  Tillotson.t 
Fourthly,  Bishop  Pearson  supposed  the  Father  to  be 
an  underived  essence,  and  the   Son  to  have  received 


*  Seeker's  Works,  Vol.  VI.  p.   126. 

Jeieiiiy  Taylor,  in  his  notions  of  a  trinity,  probably  apjn-oacliccl  as  near  to 
an  Athanasian  as  anything.  He  says,  however,  of  the  three  persons,  that 
"  they  are  three  and  one  after  a  secret  manner,  whirh  we  must  believe,  but 
cannot  understand."     Golden  Grove,  p.  2. 

t  Tillotson  calls  the  Father  "  the  fountain  of  deity,"  anrt  speaks  of  the  Sou 
as  "  an  emanation  from  him."  He  tells  us,  that  "  there  arc  three  differences  in 
tlie  deity,  which  the  Scripture  speaks  of  b}''  the  names  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Ghost."  He  informs  us  also  that  he  has  no  objection  to  the  word  person  tu 
denote  these  differences,  though  he  adds,  "  I  renieniber  that  St.  Jerom  does 
somewhere  desire  to  be  excuSefl  from  it."  Tilh(scn\i  Works,  Vol.  iii.  p.  233. 
278. 


,,ET.  I.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  137 

everything  by  communication  from  God  the  Father. 
*  Here  can  be  but  one  person,'  says  he,  '  originally  of 
himself  subsisting  in  that  infinite  Being,  because  a 
plurality  of  more  persons  so  subsisting  would  neces- 
sarily infer  a  plurality  of  Gods.'  The  Son  possessed 
the  whole  divine  nature  by  communication,  and  not 
by  participation,  and  in  such  a  way,  that  he  was  as 
really  God,  as  the  Father.  Bishop  Bull  and  Dr. 
Owen  adopted  a  similar  theory."*  Fifthly,  in  the 
system  of  Dr.  Thomas  Burnet,  the  Father  is  a  self- 
existent  being,  the  Son  and  Spirit  are  dependent ;  but 
so  united,  that  divine  perfections  and  worship  may 
be  ascribed  to  each.  Sixthly,  Mr.  Baxter  defines  the 
three  divine  persons  to  be  wisdom  power,  and  love ; 
and  illustrates  his  meaning  by  the  vital  power,  intel- 
lect^ and  will,  in  the  soul  of  man,  and  by  motion,  light, 
and  heat,  in  the  sun.  For  this  explanation  he  was 
indebted  to  the  sharpened  wits  of  the  schoolmen. 

*'  Seventhly,  Bishop  Burgess  supposes  the  three  per- 
sons to  make  one  God,  but  does  not  allow,  that  these 
persons  are  three  beings.  He  makes  out  his  position 
by  the  following  syllogism.  '  The  Scriptures  declare 
that  there  is  only  one  God ;  the  same  Scriptures  de- 
clare that  there  are  three  omnipresent  persons;  but 
there  cannot  be  two  omnipresent  beings.''  According 
to  this  hypothesis  the  trinity  is  made   up  of  three 

*  Bishop  Pearson's  Exposition  of  the  Creed,  Oxford,  1792,  Vol.  I,  p.  157, 
217. 

Speaking  of  the  Son,  Dr.  Owen  says,  that  '<  He  is  the  essential  image  of  the 
Father,  hecause  all  the  properties  of  the  divine  nature  are  communicated  unto 
liim,  together  with  personality,  from  the  Father."  Declaration  of  the  Glori- 
ous Mi/steryof  the  Person  of  Christ,  p.  100. 

18 


138  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  ni. 

nonentities  called  persons.*  Eighthly,  Bishop  Gas- 
trell  says,  '  The  three  names  of  God  the  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost,  must  denote  a  threefold  difference, 
or  distinction,  belonging  to  God,  but  such  as  is  consis- 
tent with  the  unity  and  simplicity  of  the  divine  na- 
ture ;  for  each  of  these  includes  the  ichole  idea  of 
God,  and  something  more.  So  far  as  they  express 
the  nature  of  God,  ihey  all  adequately  and  exactly 
signify  the  same.  It  is  the  additional  signification, 
which  makes  all  the  distinction  between  them.'  Ac- 
cording to  Bishop  Gastrell,  then,  each  person  of  the 
trinity  includes  the  whole  idea  of  God,  and  something 
more^  but  when  all  taken  together,  they  make  the 
idea  of  one  God,  and  no  more.t  JVinthly^  a  scheme, 
which  certainly  vies  with  any  other  for  novelty,  is 
that  lately  advanced  by  Mr.  Heber,  in  his  Bampton 
Lectures.  He  has  made  the  discovery,  that  the 
second  and  third  persons  in  the  trinity  are  no  other 
than  the  angels  Michael  and  Gabriel.  It  was  the 
second  person,  who  conversed  with  Moses  on  Mount 
Sinai;  and  the  third  person,  who  constituted  the 
Jewish  Schekinah.  To  clear  up  this  point,  the  eru- 
dite lecturer  levies  most  heavily  on  the  Jewish  Rab- 
bies,  the  Targums,  the  Mahometan  Doctors,  and  the 
ancient  Fathers.^     Lastly,  I  will  mention  only  one 


*  Bishop  Burgess'  Brief  Memoiial,  p.  21. — Belsliam's   Reply  to  Moysey,  p, 
12G. 

I  Moysey 's  Baraplon  Lectures,  p.  58. — Also,  Reply  to  Moysey,  p.  31. 

\  Heber's  Bampton   Lectures,  preached   before   the  University  of  Oxford. 
!815,  p.  211.  228.     Ai)pejndix  to  Lecture  IV,  p.  240—250. 


tET.  I.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  139 

scheme  more,  which  is  that  of  Dr.  Sherlock,  as  con- 
tained in  his  Vindication  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Trin- 
ity. He  says,  'The  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost, 
are  as  really  distinct  persons,  as  Peter,  James,  and 
John ;  each  of  which  is  God.  We  must  allow  each 
person  to  be  a  God.  These  three  infinite  minds  are 
distinguished,  just  as  three  created  minds  are,  by  self 
consciousness ;  and  by  mutual  consciousness,  each  per- 
son of  these  has  the  whole  wisdom,  power,  and  good- 
ness of  the  other  two.'  This  scheme  differs  little 
from  the  Athanasian,  except  in  being  more  clear  and 
definite."* 

Such  are  some  of  the  modes  in  which  the  trinity 
has  been  represented  by  those,  Avho  have  been  most 
zealous  to  defend  the  doctrine.  And  even  here  we 
have  only  the  outlines,  the  elements,  of  general  sys^ 
tems,  which  have  been  divided  and  subdivided  into 
innumerable  new  and  peculiar  forms,  bearing   little 

*  See  Letters  on  the  Ministry,  Ritual,  and  Doctrines  of  the  Protestant  Epis- 
copal Church,  p.  149. 

On  another  occasion  Dr.  Sherlock  says,  that  Christ  "  was  perfect  God,  and 
perfect  man  in  one  person."  Scripture  Proofs  of  our  Saviour^s  Divinity,  p. 
262. 

Dr.  Horsely  gives  a  most  singular  account  of  the  origin  of  the  second  per- 
son in  the  trinity.  He  says  it  was  "  a  principle,  which  was  common  to  all 
the  Platonic  Fathers  and  seems  to  he  founded  in  Scripture,  that  the  existence 
of  the  Son  flows  necessarily  from  the  divine  intellect  exerted  on  itself  ;/ro»« 
the  Father's  contemplation  of  his  own  perfections."  Tracts  in  Controversy 
with  Priestley,  p.  55.  Whether  he  puts  the  greater  confidence  in  the  Platonic 
Fathers,  or  the  Scriptures,  must  be  left  for  those  to  decide,  who  can  detect  any 
meaning  in  this  dark  paragraph.  He  quotes  Melancthon,  but  sheds  no  light 
on  this  darkness.     See  Disq.  IV. 

For  a  more  full  account  of  some  of  the  above  statements,  see  Doddridge's 
Lectures,  Part  VII,  Prop,  132.— Lindsey's  Apology,  p.  63. — Adams's  Diction- 
ary, 4th  ed.  p.  291. —Reply  to  Moysey,  p.  28—32,  123—130. 


140  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  iii. 

resemblance  to  their  originals.  Which  of  these 
trinities  is  the  one,  that  shall  make  a  man  a  true 
christian?  Which  is  scaled  with  the  stamp  of  ortho- 
doxy ;  and  which  is  to  be  relied  on  as  an  article  of 
saving  faith  ? 

Although  no  definite  notions  of  any  single  doc- 
trine, which  Trinitarians  would  unite  in  calling  the 
trinity,  can  be  collected  from  this  chaos  of  incerti- 
tude and  variety,  yet  a  few  landmarks  may  be  dis- 
cerned, which  would  seem  to  have  served  as  com- 
mon guides;  and  the  numerous  schemes,  to  Avhich 
the  prolific  invention  of  theologians  has  given  birth, 
may  all  be  arranged  f)erhaps,  without  much  violence, 
under  two  general  ones,  the  Modal^  and  the  Triper- 
sonal.  The  former  teaches  a  trinity  of  relations  in 
the  Deity,  and  the  latter  a  trinity  of  beings.  The 
modalists  have  succeeded  in  establishing  a  trinity  in 
name,  and  destroying  it  in  reality,  for  there  is  no 
more  reason  why  we  should  suppose  three  relations 
in  the  Deity,  than  three  hundred.  It  would  be  im- 
pious, indeed,  to  limit  these  to  any  certain  number. 
When  a  mode  signifies  any  thing  more  than  a  rela- 
tion, it  is  concerned  with  the  nature,  or  being,  or  es- 
sence of  God,  and  then  it  belongs  to  some  example 
under  the  general  division  of  tripe rsonal  trinity.  As 
neither  the  unity,  nor  attributes  of  God,  are  affected 
by  this  modal  system,  it  differs  in  no  essential  respect 
from  Unitarianism.  It  is  the  same  thing  under  a 
different  name,  and  its  bearing  is  nearly  the  same  on 
the  object  of  worship,  on  morals,  and  the  means  of 
piety. 


Lj-T.  1.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  141 

The  last  general  scheme  referred  to  by  Stllling- 
fleet,  or  what  has  rather  been  made  an  apology  for 
a  scheme,  has  become  very  popular  of  late.  It  is 
that,  which  shrouds  the  trinity  in  a  mystery.  This 
is  a  last  resort,  and  comes  in  most  opportunely  when 
every  attempt  at  explanation  fails.  It  rejects  the 
aid  of  reason,  as  fallacious  and  deceptive,  and  throws 
an  impenetrable  veil  of  obscurity  over  revelation.  It 
is,  nevertheless,  founded  on  a  principle,  which  is  of 
universal  application.  Whenever  you  are  perplexed 
in  any  argument,  or  caught  between  the  griping 
horns  of  a  dilemma,  you  have  only  to  cry  out,  a  mys- 
tery, and  your  victory  is  accomplished  :  you  are  en- 
cased in  an  armour  of  adamant,  and  may  exult  with 
great  composure  over  the  weakness  of  your  antago- 
nist, who  can  wield  no  other  weapons,  than  such  as 
are  supplied  by  common  sense,  reason,  and  plain 
truth. 

No  one,  it  is  presumed,  ever  put  on  this  armour, 
till  he  found  these  weapons  inadequate  to  his  pur- 
pose. A  mystical  revelation  is  a  contradiction  in 
terms ;  and  a  mystical  trinity,  whatever  else  it  may 
mean,  can  never  mean  a  revealed  trinity.  Just  in 
proportion  as  you  detect  mysteries  in  the  Gospel,  or 
doctrines,  which  were  professedly  taught  as  revealed 
truths  of  the  greatest  importance,  but  not  intended 
to  be  understood,  just  so  far  you  will  find  reasons  to 
distrust  the  divine  authority  of  the  religion  of  the 
Saviour,  and  to  disrespect  its  author.  This  notion 
concerning  the  trinity  may  be  laid  out  of  the  ques- 
tion, as  it  would  be  an  idle  waste  of  time  and  words 
to  talk  about  a  thing  of  which  we  do  not  pretend  to 


142  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  m. 

have  any  distinct  conceptions.  If  there  be  any  thing 
in  this  mystery,  or  in  any  other  mystery,  especially 
conducive  to  morals,  this  must  be  left  to  the  wisdom 
of  the  initiated  todeveiope. 

My  future  remarks  will  be  chiefly  directed  to  the 
grand  division  of  the  trinity  above  denominated  the 
Tripersonal  ;  and  that  1  may  not  be  perplexed  with 
the  endless  differences  of  opinion  existing  among 
those,  who  are  ranged  in  this  division,  I  Avill  confine 
myself  to  that  more  simple  form  of  the  doctrine 
contained  in  the  Confession  of  Faith.  "  In  the  unity 
of  the  Godhead,  there  be  three  persons  of  one  sub- 
stance, power,  and  eternity  ;  God  the  Father,  God 
the  Son,  and  God  the  Holy  Ghost."*  As  a  general 
definition,  this  would  seem  sufficiently  clear.  Every 
person,  who  assents  to  it,  has  views  peculiar  to  him- 
self respecting  the  nature  and  relations  of  the  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  yet  all  suppose  them  to  be 
three  distinct  persons,  and  that  each  person  is  God. 
To  this  notion  of  the  doctrine  my  future  investiga- 
tions will  be  limited.  It  does  not  come  within  my 
present  object  to  inquire  how  it  could  be  brought  to 
pass,  that  three  persons,  each  of  whom  is  God,  could 
make  one  being  and  one  God ;  or  how  there  could 
be  three  persons,  or  beings,  each  of  whom  is  God, 
and  not  be  three  Gods.  I  am  engaged  with  the  na- 
ture, the  origin,  and  tendency  of  this  doctrine,  and 
not  with  its  truth,  or  consistency .t 

*  Confession  of  Faith,  Chap.  II,  Sec.  3. 

t  Dr.  South  seriously  discourses  on   the  subject  as  follows.     «  That  any 
pne  should  be  both  father  and  son  to  the  same  person,  produce   himself,  bo 


LET.  u]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  143 

In  regard  to  its  nature,  or  to  the  thing  itself, 
which  is  called  trinity  by  those,  who  profess  to  be- 
lieve a  doctrine  under  this  name,  enough  has  been 
said.  Before  I  proceed  to  examine  the  Scripture  au- 
thority, and  the  tendency  of  the  kind  of  trinity  last 
mentioned,  I  will  devote  a  few  words  to  some  of 
your  views  on  this  subject. 

In  explaining  what  you  understand  by  the  term 
Unitarian,  you  express  yourself  in  the  following  man- 
ner. "  When  the  orthodox  use  this  title,  they  con- 
sider it  as  only  designating  those,  who  reject  all  be- 
lief in  that  mysterious  threefold  mode  of  existence  in 
the  one  Supreme  and  Eternal  Jehovah,  which  the 
Scriptures,  as  Ave  think,  plainly  teach ;  which  lies  at 
the  foundation  of  the  Avhole  plan  of  redemption  ; 
and  of  which  the  rejection  always  has  been,  and  «/- 
ivays  must  be,  connected  with  a  denial  of  every  essen- 
tial principle  of  the  GospeV  This  passage  is  of 
so  remarkable  a  character,  that  it  will  admit  of  a 
short  analysis. 

We  are  here  told  of  a  "  mysterious  threefold 
mode  of  existence"  in  the  Deity.  What  are  we  to 
understand  by  this  phrase  ?  I  do  not  ask  hoio  the 
Deity  exists  in  three  modes,  nor  how  he  exists  in  any 
manner,  nor  what  a  mode  is  ;  I  simply  ask  what  is 
the  meaning  of  the  words  here  put  together.  To 
my  mind  they  convey  no  ideas  whatever;  they  are 

cause  and  effect  too,  and  so  the  copy  give  being  to  its  original,  seems  at  first 
sight  so  very  strange  and  unaccountable,  that  were  it  not  to  be  adored  as  a 
mystery,  it  would  be  exploded  as  a  contradiction."  South's  Sermons,  Vol.  III. 
p.  140,  Lond.  1718. 


144  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  in. 

mere  sounds,  which  fall  on  the  ear,  and  are  lost. 
Before  we  can  have  a  true  faith,  is  it  necessary  to 
talk  of  the  Supreme  Being  without  ideas,  and  to  de- 
scribe his  nature  in  combinations  of  words  to  which 
we  can  affix  no  meaning  ? 

Again,  it  is  said,  that  this  mysterious  nature  of  God 
is  plainly  taught  in  the  Scriptures.  How  then 
should  it  be  so  mysterious?  In  most  cases,  it  would 
be  natural  to  expect,  that  things,  which  are  plainly 
taught,  must  be  clearly  understood ;  and  not  only  so, 
but  that  the  language  used  to  express  them  should 
be  so  constructed  as  to  communicate  definite  ideas. 

Moreover,  you  go  on  to  say,  that  a  "  rejection  of 
this  mysterious  threefold  mode  of  existence  always 
has  been,  and  always  must  be,  connected  with  a  de- 
nial of  every  essential  principle  of  the  Gospel." 
That  is,  to  reject  a  proposition,  which,  in  the  very 
terms  of  it,  is  confessed  to  be  mysterious,  of  which  no 
mortal  can  form  a  distinct  conception,  and  to  which 
no  intelligible  meaning  can  be  affixed ;  to  reject  this 
proposition,  which  it  is  impossible  for  a  rational  man 
not  to  reject,  is  to  be  accounted  a  "  denial  of  every 
essential  principle  of  the  Gospel."  Nay,  this  "  al- 
ways has  been,  and  always  must  be"  the  dreadful 
consequence.  A  hard  necessity,  truly,  for  conscien- 
tious christians,  who  think  it  their  duty  to  obey  the 
Saviour  and  Apostles  in  preference  of  all  others,  and 
who  cannot  profess  a  belief  in  a  thing  of  which  they 
have  no  conceptions.  But,  after  all,  perhaps  they 
may  be  permitted  to  look  into  the  Bible,  and  have 
some  respect  for  the  revealed    \vord    of  God  ;   per- 


LET.  I.]  TRINITY  AND   ATONEMEiNT.  145 

haps  they  may  have  the  hberty  of  searching  for  the 
place  in  which  our  Sav  iour  has  authorized  any  one 
of  his folloAvers  to  proclaim  to  all  the  rest  what  "al- 
ways has  been  and  always  must  be,"  in  respect  to 
their  faith,  and  their  understanding  of  the  Scriptures. 
Perhaps  they  may  be  tolerated  in  thinking  a  reality 
better  than  a  mode,  and  a  truth  better  than  a  specu- 
lation. 

How  does  it  appear,  that  a  rejection  of  this  myste- 
rious threefold  mode  of  existence  is  connected  with  a 
denial  of  every  essential  principle  of  the  Gospel  ?  Are 
not  the  doctrines  of  the  divine  attributes,  a  superin- 
tending providence,  the  moral  agency  of  man,  the 
Messiahship  of  Jesus,  repentance,  pardon  of  the  peni- 
tent, a  resurrection,  future  state  of  retribution,  and 
salvation  by  the  free  grace  of  God ;  are  not  love  to 
our  Maker  and  to  our  brethren,  faith  and  charity, 
piety  and  benevolence;  are  not  these  essential  prin- 
ciples of  the  Gospel  ?  And  what  have  they  to  do 
with  a  metaphysical  notion  about  a  mysterious  mode 
of  existence?  Must  we  be  censured  as  skeptics  in 
these  most  important  principles,  or  as  denying  them 
altogether,  unless  we  can  detect  some  faint  glimmer- 
ing of  light  in  the  chaotic  darkness  of  this  proposi- 
tion ? 

But  before  we  are  required  to  believe  in  this  doc- 
trine of  modes,  we  have  not  only  a  right  to  demand 
what  is  meant  by  the  form  of  speech  in  which  it  is 
expressed,  but  also  what  is  meant  by  a  mode  itself. 
When  you  talk  of  a  mode  of  existence  in  God,  do  you 
mean  that  he  is  a  divided,  changeable  being;  that 
19 


146  TRINITY  AJVD  ATO?sEMEiNT.  [part  lu, 

he  exists  in  diiferent  forms  at  different  times  and 
places ;  that  he  has  certain  capacities  of  will  and  ac- 
tion to  day,  and  opposite  ones  to  morrow?  If  this  be 
your  meaning,  it  is  intelligible  enough.  But  if  you 
add  to  this,  that  God  is  one  and  indivisible,  simple  in 
his  nature  and  unchangeable  in  his  being,  we  are 
again  involved  in  obscurity,  and  compelled  to  ac- 
knowledge, that  to  your  notions  we  can  attach  no 
ideas.  We  see  only  contradiction  and  absurdity.  A 
trinity  of  this  kind  of  modes  either  destroys  the  unity 
of  God,  or  destroys  itself.  When  it  is  reduced  to 
such  a  form  as  to  be  understood,  it  denotes  three  be- 
ings, or  distinct  intelligences  in  God ;  when  it  cannot 
be  understood,  it  is  either  a  contradiction,  or  means 
nothing  at  all. 

Suppose  it  be  rej)lied,  that  this  is  forcing  the  mat- 
ter too  far,  and  that  a  mode  of  existence,  or  bemg,  or 
nature,  Avas  not  literally  intended,  but  only  a  mode 
of  action.  If  we  take  the  subject  on  this  ground,  we 
shall,  it  is  true,  be  brought  back  to  something  intelligi- 
ble. God  has  certainly  many  modes  of  exercising  his 
perfections.  In  this  respect,  each  of  his  attributes 
may  be  called  a  mode.  He  displays  himself  in  va- 
rious modes  to  all  the  works  of  his  hands ;  he  is  the 
Father  and  protector  of  his  rational  creatures,  whom 
he  loves,  sustains,  and  blesses.  He  has  revealed 
himself  through  Jesus  Christ,  in  whom  were  his  wis- 
dom and  power;  he  communicated  his  holy  spirit  to 
the  Apostles,  enlightened  them  with  heavenly  truth, 
and  made  them  successful  preachers  of  a  pure  and 
persecuted  religion.     He  is  still  regardful  of  the  in 


i,ET.  I.J  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  147 

terests  of  his  church,  and  all  things  are  continually 
under  the  guidance  of  his  providence.  These  are 
some  of  the  modes  by  which  God  is  known  to  the 
universe.  All  the  perfections  of  his  nature  are 
modes,  which  never  cease  nor  change.  But  these  in 
no  way  affect  the  essence  of  his  being,  nor  the  man- 
ner of  his  existence. 

If  such  be  the  modes  to  which  you  allude,  it  does 
not  appear  why  you  call  them  threefold.  There  is 
no  limit  to  their  number,  nor  any  thing  about  them 
mysterious.  How  the  wisdom,  or  power,  or  any  other 
attribute  of  God,  operates,  is  not  to  be  understood; 
but  the  fact,  that  it  does  operate,  is  as  plain  as  any 
fact  resting  on  moral  evidence.  And  if  the  trinity 
be  any  thing,  it  must  be  a  subject  of  fact.  I  do  not 
ask  how  your  trinity  of  modes  exists,  but  what  this 
trinity  is  ?  What  is  the  image  in  your  mind,  which 
represents  a  mode,  and  what  are  the  three  modes, 
which  make  the  trinity  ?  There  can  be  no  mystery 
in  this.  You  are  desired  to  explain  no  further,  than 
you  must  necessarily  understand.  A  mode  is  either 
something  or  nothing,  as  it  concerns  the  nature  of 
God,  and  it  is  only  required  to  know  which  is  meant 
when  applied  to  the  trinity.  If  it  is  any  thing  in  re- 
ality, it  must  interfere  with  the  divine  unity  ;  if  it  is 
no  more  than  a  relation,  it  has  no  bearing  on  the  sub- 
ject, and  the  word  ought  not  to  be  employed  any 
longer  to  confuse  and  embarrass  the  understandinof 
in  its  honest  endeavours  after  truth. 

All  the  speculations,  in  short,  concerning  modes  in 
the  trinity,  have  been  no  other  than  forced  attempts 


148  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  lir. 

to  bend  an  imaginary  faith  to  a  name.  Persons,  who 
have  thus  exercised  themselves,  have  found  it  impos- 
sible to  resist  the  evidence  of  the  simple  unity,  but 
have  thought  it  necessary  at  all  hazards  to  hold  fast 
to  the  name  of  trinity.  As  realities  could  not  be 
found,  they  have  resorted  to  modes,  and  when  the 
substance  was  wholly  gone,  they  have  been  contented 
with  shadows.  Some  have  discovered,  that  a  sha- 
dow is  nothing,  and  all  at  once  surprized  themselves 
in  the  fearful  ranks  of  Unitarians.  No  remedy  was 
left  but  mystery;  and  when  to  the  nothingness  of  a 
mode  is  added  the  darkness  of  mystery,  that  must  be 
a  barren  imagination  indeed,  which  cannot  with  a 
tranquil  conscience  adapt  its  faith  to  any  measure, 
and  accommodate  it  to  any  name. 

Having  thus  spoken  of  the  nature  of  trinity,  and  of 
the  infinite  variety  of  opinions,  which  come  under 
that  name,  we  may  now  go  on  to  consider  the 
grounds  on  which  it  is  supposed  to  be  plainly  tavght  in 
the  Scriptures.  My  remarks  in  the  next  letter  will 
be  chiefly  applicable  to  the  doctrine  in  its  broad- 
est sense,  but  particularly  adapted  to  that  branch  of 
it  quoted  above  from  the  Calvinistic  formulary  of 
faith. 


l,ET.  n.j  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  149 

LETTER  II. 

Doctrine  of  a  Trinity  not  taught   in  the  Scriptures. 


At  the  present  day,  it  is  common  for  Trinitarians 
to  discourse  of  the  plainness  with  which  their  doc- 
trine is  expressed  in  the  Scriptures.  They  find  it  in 
almost  every  chapter  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the 
New,  and  wonder  that  any  one  can  be  so  dull,  or  so 
perverse,  as  not  to  see  and  confess  a  truth,  which  to 
them  shines  so  brightly. 

Many  reasons  occur,  however,  which  induce  those, 
who  have  not  been  so  fortunate  as  to  make  this  dis- 
covery in  any  part  of  the  Bible,  to  think  that  the  be- 
lievers in  a  trinity  labour  under  some  deception  in 
this  respect,  either  from  their  predilections,  their 
zeal  for  a  favourite  opinion,  or  from  a  combination  of 
causes  not  difficult  to  be  enumerated.  If  the  doc- 
trine be  so  plainly  taught,  it  is  very  natural  to  ask, 
how  it  comes  to  pass,  that  thousands  and  tens  of 
thousands  do  not  find  it,  who  yet  inquire  with  the 
same  advantages,  the  same  motives  and  vigilance, 
with  a  resolution  equally  determined,  and  a  zeal 
equally  ardent,  as  those  who  boast  of  a  better  suc- 
cess ? 

The  details  of  my  last  lettei;  throw  obstacles  not 
to  be  surmounted  in  the  way  of  the  notion,  that  the 


150  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  m. 

Scriptures  plainly  teach  a  trinity.  The  friends  of 
the  doctrine  themselves  are  full  of  differences  and 
contradictions;  they  agree  in  nothing ;  they  have  no 
common  principles;  and  when  they  attempt  to  ex- 
plain, they  are  obscure,  and  at  variance  with  each 
other.  Their  trinities  are  infinite  in  number  and  va- 
riety. What  stronger  proof  can  be  given,  that  no 
doctrine  which  has  received  the  name  of  trinity,  is 
an  obvious  doctrine  of  the  Bible  ?  If  it  were  said  to 
be  hidden,  and  found  only  by  patient  and  deep  re- 
search, the  problem  would  be  much  less  difficult  to 
solve.  It  would,  indeed,  afford  something  like  a 
plausible  reason,  why  persons  have  come  to  such  dis- 
similar results  in  looking  for  it.  But  to  tell  us  a 
thing  is  plain^  which  many  cannot  see  at  all,  and  of 
which  those,  who  do  see  it,  have  no  consistent  or 
definite  conceptions,  if  this  be  not  a  contradiction  in 
terms.  It  is  a  glaring  misuse  of  language. 

The  opinion,  that  the  trinity  is  plainly  taught  in 
tlie  Scriptures,  has  not  generally  prevailed  till  of  late. 
So  far  were  Trinitarians  from  holding  such  an  opi- 
nion in  former  times,  that  In  nothing  did  they  exer- 
cise their  ingenuity  more,  than  in  devising  reasons 
why  this  doctrine  should  be  only  obscurely  shadowed 
forth  by  the  Saviour  and  the  Apostles,  and  why  it 
should  be  kept  wholly  concealed  from  the  Jews. 
This  subject  merits  discussion,  not  because  it  affects 
the  Scriptural  evidence  in  regard  to  the  truth  or 
falsehood  of  the  doctrine;  but  because  it  is  intimate- 
ly connected  with  the  presumj)tion  of  making  the 
trinity  a  necessary  article  of  faith,  which  all  person* 


LET,  ii.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  151 

must  believe  before  they  can  be  called  christians,  or 
hope  for  salvation.  If  the  primitive  christians  knew 
nothing  of  this  doctrine,  it  is  absurd  to  clothe  it  with 
so  much  importance ;  nay,  it  is  actually  putting  a 
false  character  on  the  religion  of  Jesus,  and  deceiving 
the  humble  inquirer  into  a  fatal  reliance  on  things, 
which  can  have  no  good  tendency  on  his  religious  or 
moral  conduct.  In  this  light  the  subject  is  worth 
pursuing. 

Let  us  go  back  to  the  time  of  our  Saviour,  and 
inquire  of  the  people,  who  listened  to  his  preaching; 
let  us  accompany  the  Apostles  in  their  travels,  and 
ascertain  the  opinions,  which  were  derived  from 
their  Instructions ;  let  us  refer  to  the  first  believers 
in  Christianity,  to  the  early  and  later  Fathers,  to  the 
Catholics  after  the  Reformation,  to  some  of  the  first 
reformers,  to  the  Arminians  of  Holland,  and  even  to 
eminent  English  divines.  The  train  of  testimony, 
which  might  be  brought  from  these  sources,  would 
show  with  how  little  discretion  the  trinity  is  now  af- 
firmed to  be  plainly  taught  in  the  Scriptures,  and 
with  how  little  regard  to  consistency  it  is  imposed  as 
a  necessary  article  of  faith. 

In  the  first  place,  then,  it  will  not  be  denied,  that 
the  great  design  of  the  revelations  contained  in 
the  Old  Testament  Avas  to  acquaint  the  Jews  with 
the  true  nature  of  God ;  nor  will  it  be  denied,  that 
from  all  these  revelations  they  had  no  conceptions  of 
any  other  mode  of  existence,  than  that  of  his  simple 
unity.  It  was  perpetually  enforced  on  them  as  a 
fundamental  truth,  that   the  "  Lord  their  God  was 


152  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  ill. 

one "  No  history,  either  sacred  or  profane,  ac- 
quaints us  with  a  single  fact,  from  which  it  can  be  in- 
ferred, that  the  Jews  had  any  knowledge  of  a  three- 
fold nature  in  the  Deity.  On  the  contrary,  all  his- 
tory is  against  such  an  inference  ;  and  the  demonstra- 
ble certainty,  that  these  people,  for  whose  light  and 
improvement  the  Old  Testament  was  expressly  de- 
signed, never  had  the  remotest  suspicion  of  such  a 
doctrine  being  contained  in  their  sacred  books,  is  the 
clearest  possible  evidence,  that  it  is  not  plainly  taught 
there,  whatever  may  now  be  deduced  from  types, 
and  shadows,  and  dark  sayings,  and  HebreAV  idioms, 
and  double  meanings. 

And,  again,  where  does  it  appear,  that  the  people 
to  whom  our  Saviour  preached,  understood  him  to 
describe  God  as  existing  in  a  threefold  nature ;  Or, 
to  put  the  question  in  a  more  direct  shape,  where 
does  it  appear,  that  in  one  instance,  he  spoke  of 
him  as  any  other,  than  the  one  true  God?  The  only- 
history  we  have  of  the  opinions  of  that  period  is  con- 
tained in  the  Gospels;  and  there  we  are  made  to 
know,  as  distinctly  as  we  can  be  made  know,  that 
Christ  ascribes  all  things  to  one  Being,  whom 
he  calls  the  Father  and  the  Creator.  To  whom  did 
he  offer  prayers,  render  homage,  and  acknowledge 
submission?  Was  it  not  invariably  to  one  God,  the 
Father?  Did  he  ever  address  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  a 
separate  being  called  "  God  the  Holy  Ghost,"  or 
another,  called  "  God  the  Son  ?"  Never.  His  mira- 
cles, his  divine  mtclligence,  all  his  superiour  powers, 
he  refers  to  one  Being,  the  Father,  not  once  only,  but 


liET.  11.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  153 

always.  He  never  declares  himself  the  true  God, 
nor  equal  to  the  true  God  ;  and  his  example  and 
character  from  beginning  to  end  are  as  opposite  as 
any  thing  can  be  to  such  an  opinion. 

The  sentiments  of  the  people,  as  far  as  we  can 
learn,  were  in  exact  accordance  with  these  traits  of 
his  conduct  and  instructions.  Were  their  actions,  or 
their  conversation,  or  their  behaviour  towards  him 
such,  as  would  be  expected,  if  they  believed  the  Su- 
preme Jehovah  to  be  with  them  in  bodily  presence? 
This  question  applies  equally  in  regard  to  his  disci- 
ples and  his  enemies.  When  he  healed  a  sick  man 
by  a  miracle,  "  the  multitude  marvelled,  and  glo- 
rified God,  Avho  had  given  so  much  power  unto 
men."  They  did  not  marvel,  that  God  had  come 
down  on  the  earth,  but  that  he  had  clothed  with 
such  power  a  man  in  all  appearances  like  themselves. 
Mary  said  to  him,  after  the  death  of  Lazarus,  "  If 
thou  hadst  been  here,  ray  brother  had  not  died." 
When  she  spoke  these  words,  could  she  believe  him 
to  be  the  infinite  God,  who  is  every  where  equally 
present  with  his  love  and  his  power  ?  Many  exam- 
ples of  this  sort  might  be  added,  Avere  it  necessary; 
but  no  one,  it  is  presumed,  will  undertake  to  prove  it 
to  have  been  a  prevailing  opinion  among  the  contem- 
poraries of  our  Saviour,  that  he  was  God,  or  that  in 
the  nature  of  God  were  three  distinct  persons.  The 
testimony  and  probability  are  against  such  a  result  ; 
and  it  would  be  no  better  than  presumptuous,  idle 
conjecture,  to  represent  the  trinity  as  plainly  taught, 
20 


154  TRINITY  A]\D  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

if  taught  at  all,  In  our  Saviour's  immediate  instruc- 
tions. 

When  we  come  to  the  preaching  of  the  Apostles, 
we  hear  nothing  of  their  promulgating  a  trinity.  We 
have  a  minute  account  of  their  preaching  Avritten  by 
St.  Luke  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles;  and  we  here 
.look  in  vain  for  any  place  in  which  they  teach  the 
deity  of  Christ,  or  the  existence  of  a  trinity.  Nor 
can  it  be  inferred  from  any  thing  said  or  done  by 
their  hearers,  that  they  understood  them  to  publish 
such  doctrines.  The  Messiahship  of  Jesus,  a  future 
retribution,  and  the  necessity  of  repentance,  were 
the  doctrines  on  which  they  chiefly  dwelt.  St.  Pe- 
ter's sermon  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  and  Paul's  dis- 
course to  the  Athenians,  represent  Christ  as  sustain- 
ing a  character  not  only  distinct  from  God,  but  in  all 
respects  subordinate  to  him,  acting  by  his  commands, 
and  moved  by  his  influence. 

In  shoi't,  it  cannot  be  proved,  that  the  persons  in- 
structed by  the  prophets,  the  Saviour,  and  the  Apos- 
tles, had  any  notions  of  a  trinity;  while  on  the  con- 
trary, almost  every  page  of  the  Bible  is  loud  in  pro- 
claiming the  divine  unity,  and  in  establishing  the  fact, 
that  this  was  the  faith  of  all  true  believers.  Infer- 
ence, in  this  case,  cannot  be  admitted  as  argument.  If 
the  trinity  be  any  thing,  it  is  as  essential  to  the  divine 
nature  as  the  unity,  and  if  one  was  as  plainly  taught 
as  the  other,  we  should  have  the  same  evidence  of 
their  having  been  equally  believed.  We  have  no  such 
evidence,  but  abundance  to  the  contrary,  and  this  is 
enough  to  justify  us  in  affirming,  that  the  trinity  was 


LET.  II.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT,  155 

not  preached  by  the  Saviour  and  his  Apostles  in  such 
a  manner  as  to  be  understood  at  the  time. 

Let  us  see,  in  the  next  place,  how  this  result  agrees 
Avith  the  sentiments  of  some  of  the  earl}^  Fathers. 
We  shall  here  find  almost  a  universal  opinion,  that 
the  deitv  of  Christ  was  not  plainly  taught  in  the 
Scriptures;  and  as  for  a  trinity  of  persons,  nothing  is 
heard  of  it,  till  the  deity  of  the  Holy  Spirit  was  de- 
creed by  the  council  of  Constantinople,  near  the 
close  of  the  fourth  century.  A  few  passages  from 
the  Fathers  shall  here  be  introduced,  merely  to 
substantiate  the  fact,  that  in  their  opinion  the  trinity 
was  not  explicitly  taught,  either  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment or  the  New. 

Athanasius  allows,  that  Christ  did  not  make  known 
his  deity  to  the  Jews,  and  endeavours  to  account  for 
it,  by  intimating,  that  the  world  could  not  yet  bear 
such  a  doctrine.  And  he  adds,  "  I  venture  to  affirm, 
that  even  the  blessed  disciples  themselves  had  not  a 
clear  knowledge  of  his  deity,  »^£  «■«?<  t))j  xvtv  ^loT^xa  ux<>» 
fg(»»««4«,  till  the  Holy  Spirit  came  on  them  at  the  day 
of  Pentecost."*  This  passage  has  a  comprehensive 
import,  and  proves  most  clearly,  that  in  the  opinion 
of  Athanasius,  the  deity  of  Christ  was  not  known 
even  to  the  Apostles  till  after  his  death.  Theodo- 
ret  speaks  to  the  same  purpose.  "  Before  his  death 
and  sufferings,  the  Lord  Christ,  ihrweT^i  xi'^'>if  did  not 
appear  as  God,  either  to  the  Jcavs  generally,  or  to 
his   Apostles."!      Chrysostom  often  intimates,  that 

*  Serm    Major  de  Fid.  Montf.  Coll.  Vol.  II,  p.  39. 
+  Opera  Vol.  Ill,  p.  15.  Ed.  Hal. 


156  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  iir. 

Christ  made  but  an  imperfect  indication  of  his  deity 
to  his  disciples.  On  one  occasion  he  observes,  Christ 
"  did  not  immediately  reveal  his  deity ;  at  first  he 
was  thou':^ht  to  be  a  prophet,  Christ,  simply  a  man, 
M.H-KUC,  ct^e^uTroi  ;  but  at  last  from  his  works  and  sayings 
it  appeared  what  he  was."*  Chrysostom  further 
says,  that  Mary,  the  mother  of  Jesus,  did  not  herself 
know  the  secret  of  his  being  the  Supreme  God.t 

The  Fathers,  also,  acknowledged,  that  after  the 
death  of  Christ,  the  Apostles  did  not  teach  this  doc- 
trine openly ;  as  we  learn  from  the  hypothesis  fram- 
ed by  them  to  account  for  the  fact.  They  profess  to 
consider  it  a  mark  of  prudence  and  caution  in  the 
Apostles  to  avoid  promulgating  so  unpopular  a  tenet. 
It  would  shock  the  prejudices  of  the  Jews,  on  the  one 
hand,  who  thought  the  unity  of  God  a  vital  doctrine  ; 
and  on  the  other  hand,  it  would  encourage  the 
heathens  in  their  polytheism  and  idolatry ;  and  thus 
serious  obstacles  would  be  thrown  in  the  way  of  con- 
verting either  Jews  or  Gentiles  to  Christianity.  It 
was  deemed  wise,  therefore,  to  conceal  for  a  time  a 
doctrine  of  such  dangerous  tendency. 

Let  the  Fathers  speak  on  this  point.  Chrysostom 
acquaints  us,  that  our  Saviour  confined  himself  to  in- 
structions concerning  his  human  powers,  by  reason  of 
the  "  weakness  of  his  hearers,  and  the  inability  of 
those  who  saw  and  heard  him  for  the  first  time,  to 
receive     more    sublime    discourses. "J       He     makes 

^  0|uMa,  Vol.  VIII,  p.  20.  t  Ibid.  \'ol    III,  p.  289. 

\  Ibid.  Vol.  I,  p.  409. 


LET.  II.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  157 

the  same  remark  in  commentins:  on  the  intro- 
ductory  words  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.* 
Qi^cumenius  says,  in  remarking  on  the  text,  There  is 
one  God  the  Father,  and  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that 
"  The  Apostle  speaks  cautiously  of  the  Father  and 
the  Son,  calling  the  Father  one  God,  lest  they  should 
thmk  there  were  two  Gods,  and  the  Son  one  Lord, 
lest  they  should  think  there  were  two  Lords."t  In 
commenting  on  another  text  we  have  the  following 
remark  of  Theophylact ;  "  Because  polytheism  then 
prevailed,  the  iVpostle  did  not  speak  plainly  of  the 
deity  of  Christ,  lest  he  should  be  thought  to  intro- 
duce many  Gods."J  Again,  "  As  others  had  made  no 
mention  of  the  existence  of  the  Logos  before  the  ages, 
John  taught  this  doctrine,  lest  the  Logos  of  God 
should  be  thought  to  be,  ■4'«^»5  «vSg*9ros,  a  mere  man."§ 
From  these  sentiments  of  the  Fathers,  it  may  just- 
ly be  inferred,  that,  in  their  opinion,  no  such  doctrine 
as  the  trinity,  nor  even  the  deity  of  Christ,  is  plainly 
set  forth  in  the  Scriptures.  They  all  agree  that  our 
Saviour  did  not  thus  teach,  and  Athanasius  repre- 
sents the  Apostles  as  ignorant  of  his  deity,  till  the 
day  of  Pentecost,  which  was  some  time  after  his 
death.     And  when  instructed  in  this  sublime  truth, 

*  'S.TTuin  airS'siac  dAJTcev  ktav  act  -^v^df,  khi  aSivtt  otx8s/v  itSijvct.ro  Tot  ^«gi  ts  Xi'^^> 
^«9-iv  oQtotS'i  uuTX  iXcLXmn.     Opera  Vol,  X,  p.  1756,  in  Heb.  Cap.  T. 

t  Opera,  Vol.  I,  p.  492.     Ed.  Lutet.  1631. 

\  Comment,  in  1  Tim.  ii.  5. 

}  Comment,  in  Matt.  Praef.  p.  1,  2.  The  original  of  all  the  above  passages, 
as  well  as  many  others  of  the  same  kind,  may  be  seen  in  Priestley's  History  of 
Earli/  Opinions,  Vol.  iii.  Book  3. 


158  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  iu. 

they  are  described  as  studiously  avoiding  to  divulge 
it,  lest  offence  might  be  given  to  weak  minds,  and  to 
the  unconverted.  We  must  remember,  that  these 
were  the  opinions  of  men,  who  for  the  most  part  be- 
lieved in  the  divinity  of  Christ  in  some  sense,  and 
were  solicitous  to  find  a  reason  why  the  Scriptures 
were  so  silent  on  the  subject.  The  circiuiistance  of 
their  forming  a  hypothesis  makes  it  evident,  that 
they  did  not  see  the  trinity  in  the  writings  of  the 
Apostles.  Theophylact,  it  is  true,  and  some  others, 
believed  John  to  have  been  more  bold,  and  to  have 
spoken  more  to  the  point  in  regard  to  this  doctrine ; 
but  this  is  no  other  than  saying,  that  it  is  not  taught 
any  where  else,  for  John  was  the  last  of  the  sacred 
writers. 

Dr.  Horsley  thought  to  weaken  the  force  of  the 
above  conclusion,  by  supposing,  that  it  was  the  nn- 
helieving  Jews  only,  towards  whom  the  caution,  or 
as  he  prefers  to  call  it,  the  "  sagacity,"  of  the  Apos- 
tles was  exercised.  To  persons  of  this  description 
the  plainer  parts  of  the  christian  faith  were  preach- 
ed, and  when  they  had  become  partially  initiated, 
the  deeper  mysteries  of  the  trinity  Avere  brought  to 
their  knowledge.  A  conjecture  so  forced  hardly  de- 
served the  notice,  which  Dr.  Priestley  condescended 
to  give  it.*  Where  do  Ave  hear  of  the  Apostles 
preaching  in  private?  They  preached  openly  to 
Jews  and  Gentiles,  converted  and  unconverted. 
Were  not  their  writings  intended  for  the  instruction 

*  Letters  to  Dr.  Horsley,  p.   45.     London,  1815. 


LET.  11.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  159 

and  benefit  of  the  whole  christian  world  ?  And  is  it 
to  be  admitted,  that  the  most  essential  parts  of  the 
true  faith  were  left  out  to  accommodate  the  unbe- 
lieving Jews  of  that  day?* 

From  the  Fathers  we  may  descend  to  later  wri- 
ters in  the  Catholic  Church,  who  were  ardent  de- 
fenders of  a  trinity,  but  have  not  considered  it  a 
Scripture  doctrine.  On  this  subject  Chilhngworth 
says  to  a  Catholic,  "  As  for  Scripture,  your  men  de- 
ny very  plainly  and  frequently,  that  this  doctrine  can 
be  proved  by  it."t     But  the  dogma  of  the  trinity 

*  In  resorting  to  this  device,  Dr.  Horsley  concedes  the  main  point  after  all, 
which  is,  that  Athanasius  could  not  find  the  trinity  in  the  writing  of  the  Apos- 
tles. "  In  their  public  sermons,"  says  Dr.  Horsley,  "addressed  to  the  unbe- 
lieving multitude,  they  were  content  to  maintain  that  Jesus,  whom  the  Jewe 
had  crucified,  was  risen  from  tlie  dead  ;  icithout  touching  his  dninUy  other- 
wise than  in  remote  allusions  ;  but  to  suppose,  that  they  carried  their  converts 
no  greater  length,  is  to  suppose  that  their  private  instruction  was  not  more 
particular,  than  their  public."  Letters  in  Reply  to  Dr.  Priestley,  p.  200, 
American  Ed.  1321.  The  only  difference  between  Priestley  and  Horsley  seems 
to  be,  that  Priestley  thought  the  Apostles  did  not  teach  at  all  any  important 
doctrines  not  contained  in  their  writings ;  SLXiA  HoxsXey  conjectured  that  these 
were  taught  secretly. 

Jamieson  labours  this  point  witli  his  usual  prolixity.  By  quoting  largely 
irom  Athanasius,  he  succeeds  in  pioviiig,  that  be  was  accustomed  to  contradict 
himself,  and  from  this  circumstance  seems  half  inclined  to  doubt  the  import  of 
the  passage,  which  made  Priestley  and  Horsley  believe,  that  Athanasius  did  not 
think  the  trinity  openly  taught  by  the  Apostles.  As  for  the  innumerable  speci- 
mens of  corroborative  testimony  collected  by  Dr.  Priestley  from  other  Fathers, 
Jamieson  says,  "  It  would  serve  no  good  purpose  to  follow  him  through  this 
labyrinth."  Vindication,  Vol.  I,  p.  293.  This  was  a  summary  mode  of  lay- 
ing out  of  the  account  some  of  the  strongest  parts  of  the  work,  which  he  was  en- 
gaged to  answer.  He  actually  admits,  as  Horsley  had  done,  the  main  point 
at  issue,  and  proceeds  to  commend  the  judgment  and  prudence  of  the  Apostles 
in  keeping  tlie  t.inity  a  secret.  He  takes  up  the  clue  of  the  unbelieving  Jews. 
which  Horsley  had  dropped,  and  pursues  it  with  great  diligence.  Ibid.  p.  294 — 
^13. 

t  Preface  to  the  Author  of  Charity  Maintained,  sec.  17.  In  support  of  this 
assertion,  Chillingworth  refers  to   Hosius  De  Author,  Sac.  1.  iii.  p.  53  ;  to 


160  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

was  in  the  creeds,  and  therefore  must  be  defended. 
Tradition  was  invoked  with  success,  but  without 
any  appeal  to  the  authority  of  Scripture.  Wolzo- 
gcnius  has  collected  the  sentiments  of  several  writers 
of  the  Romish  Church,  a  few  specimens  of  which 
shall  here  be  adduced. 

Petavius,  in  his  celebrated  work  on  the  trinity, 
speaks  as  follows.  "  Concerning  the  three  persons 
of  the  divinity,  and  their  essence,  nothing  was  fully 
written  or  known,  before  the  council  of  Nice,  because 
this  mystery  was  not  revealed  and  confirmed,  till  af- 
ter the  contest  between  the  Arians  and  Catholics."* 
Sacroboscus  tells  us,  also,  that  as  the  Arians  appeal- 
ed to  the  Scriptures  in  support  of  their  opinions, 
they  were  not  condemned  by  the  Scriptures,  but  by 
tradition.!  The  Jesuit  Scarga  writes,  that  the  "Apos- 
tles were  at  first  accustomed  to  conceal  the  dogma 
of  the  trinity  on  account  of  its  difficulty  ;"  and  that 
Paul  did  not  preach  the  deity  of  Christ  to  the  Athe- 
nians, lest  they  should  think  he  meant  to  introduce 
a  multitude  of  Gods.;|;  According  to  Bellarmine, 
"since  the  Arians  could  not  be  convinced  out  of  the 
Scriptures,  because  they  intcrj^reted  them  dilTerent- 
ly  from  the  Catholics,  they  were  condemned  by  the 


Hiintlaeus,  De  Verba  Dei,  c.  19  ;  to  Gietseius,  Zannerus,  Vega,  Possevin, 
Wickus,  and  others. 

*  De  Triniiate,  lib.  i.  cap.  1.  sec.  3. 

t  Concilii  Nicaeni  Paties  ex  doctiina  iion  scripta,  setl  per  manus  Patrum 
sibi  tradita,  eos  damnarunt.     Defe.nsio  Trid.  Cojiril.  cup.  6. 

:|:  Apostoli  dogma  trinitalis  initio  reticere  soliti  sunt,  propter  ipsius  difficul- 
tatcm. 


LET.  11.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  161 

unwritten  word  of  God,  piously  understood."*  In 
commenting  on  the  text,  in  which  Christ  tolls  his 
disciples,  that  he  has  many  things  to  say  to  them, 
which  they  cannot  hear,  Salmeron  says  he  refers  to 
the  three  persons  in  one  God,  and  the  two  natures 
in  Christ.!  Remundus  warns  the  Lutherans  and 
Calvinists,  that  if  they  rely  on  the  Scriptures  alone, 
they  will  be  obliged  to  yield  to  the  modern  Arians, 
not  less  than  were  the  Fathers  to  the  Arians  of  old, 
and  he  admonishes  them  to  take  refuge  in  tradition, 
and  the  consent  of  the  church.J 

From  these  sentiments  of  Trinitarian  writers,  it  is 
obvious,  that,  whatever  may  have  been  their  zeal 
for  a  trinity,  it  was  a  common  opinion  in  the  Catho- 
lic Church,  that  this  doctrine  was  not  to  be  support- 
ed from  the  Scriptures.  Let  all  due  allowance  be 
made  for  their  love  of  tradition,  it  will  hardly  be 
urged,  that  this  fondness  would  make  them  content- 
ed with  resting  so  important  a  dogma  on  tradition 
alone,  if  they  felt  secure  in  having  a  just  claim  to  the 
additional  and  irresistible  weight  of  the  revealed 
word  of  God.  And  least  of  all,  as  Wolzogenius  ob- 
serves, would  they  have  used  this  argument  to  those, 
who  put  no  confidence  in  any  tradition  not  sanction- 
ed by  the  plain  language  of  the  Bible.     All  parties 

*  De  Verbo  Dei,  lib.  IV,  cap.  3. 

+  Corament.  in  Joh.  XVI,  12. 

:j:  Historia  de  Ortu  et  Piogressu  Haeres.  part  I.  lib.  2.  cap.  15. 

For  these  testimonies  and  others  to  the  same  purpose,  see  Wolzogen's  Prae- 
parat.  ad  Uiil.  Section.  Librorum  J\rov.  Test.  cap.  29.  See,  also,  Unitarian 
Miscellany,  Vol.  I.  p.  329—332.     Vol.  II.  p.  81—90. 

21 


162  TRINITY  Ai\D  ATOINEMENT.  [part  in, 

held  up  the  Scriptures  as  their  standard,  and  if  the 
CathoHc  doctors  had  beheved  them  to  contain  the 
trinity,  it  would  seem  the  part  of  wisdom  and  po- 
licy, if  nothing  else,  first  to  entrench  themselves  with 
this  authority,  and  then  to  build  up  the  outworks  of 
tradition. 

Many  distinguished  Trinitarian  writers  among  the 
early  Lutherans,  were  of  opinion,  that  their  doctrine 
could  not  be  found  in  the  Old  Testament.  Wolzo- 
genius  mentions  particularly  the  learned  Calixtus, 
professor  of  theology  at  Helmstadt,  and  also  Dreger, 
Leterman,  Behm,  and  some  others. 

If  we  turn  to  the  early  Arminians,  we  shall  be 
disappointed  in  searching  for  any  evidence  from 
Avhich  it  can  be  inferred,  that  they  believed'  the  tri- 
nity to  be  a  plain  doctrine  of  the  Bible.  "  Laray 
tells  us,  that  Episcopius,  whom  he  designates  as  the 
'  chief  pillar  of  the  Arminian  party,'  did  not  consider 
a  belief  in  the  trinity  and  incarnation,  necessary  to 
salvation,  'because,  according  to  him,  they  are  not  to 
be  found  in  the  Scrijiture  in  a  clear  and  plain  manner^ 
no  more  than  other  opinions,  which  divide  chris- 
tians.'*   These  sentiments  are  contained  in  his  Theo- 


*  Lamy's  History  of  Socinianism,  translated  by  Webster,  p.  146,  Loii(1. 1729. 
Lamy  is  not  always  to  be  trusted  ;  he  wrote  with  prejudice  and  a  false  zeal. 
It  was  a  fond  wish  of  his  to  make  out  the  Arminians  to  be  "  real  Socinians." 
He  walked  in  the  steps  of  Jurieu,  and  with  as  little  success. 

Ilrnry  Taylor  says,  that  "  Episcopius  and  CuHwnrth  condemned  those  of 
undcTiiahle  tritheism,  wlio  make  the  Son  and  Spirit  in  all  things  equal  to  the 
Father."    Ben  Mordecai's  Jipology,  Vol.  I.  p.  72. 

"  Episcopius,"  says  Dr.  Horsley,"  though  himself  no  Socinian,  very  indis- 
creetly concurred  with  the  Socinians  of  his  time  in  maintaining,  that  the 
opinion  of  the  mere  humanity  of  Christ,  had  prevailed  very  generally  in  the 


LET.  II.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  163 

logical  Institutes,  which  were  highly  commended  by 
Grotius,  and  even  Father  Mabilion,  and  defended 
by  Le  Clerc  against  Jurieu  and  Bossuet.  But  what 
is  quite  as  strong  evidence  in  this  case  as  can  be  de- 
sired, is,  that  the  Arminians  never  imposed  the  trini- 
ty as  a  necessary  article  of  faith  for  christian  com- 
munion. It  is  not  contained  in  Limborch's  seven 
rules  of  Fundamentals ;  and  Le  Clerc  says  expressly, 
that  '  they  proffer  communion  to  all,  who  receive  the 
sacred  Scriptures  as  the  only  rule  of  their  faith  and 
conduct,  and  Avho  are  neither  idolaters  nor  persecu- 
tors.'* In  short,  I  am  convinced,  no  proof  can  be 
advanced,  that  the  early  writers  among  the  Armi- 
nians, such  as  Grotius,  Episcopius,  Vorstius,  and  Le 
Clerc,  considered  the  doctrine  of  the  trinity  as  plain- 
ly taught  in  the  Scriptures,  or  as  a  necessary  article 
of  Christian  faith."t  Without  doubt  the  Arminians 
believed  themselves  to  be  Trinitarians  in  some  sense, 
but  it  is  clear,  that  they  did  not  consider  the  doctrine 

first  ages,  and  was  never  deemed  heretical  by  the  Fathers  of  the  orthodox 
persuasion;  at  least,  not  insunh  degree  as  to  exclude  from  the  communion  ol 
the  church."     Charge  to  the  Clergy,  p.  22. 

*  lis  offrent  la  communion  a  toux  ceux,  qui  re5oivent  I'ecriture  sainte 
comme  laseule  regie  de  lafoi  et  des  moeiirs,  et  qui  ne  sont  ni  idolatres  ni  per- 
secuteurs.    Biblioth.  Ancitn.  et  Mod.    Tom.  XX f^.  p.  110. 

Le  Clerc  says  nearly  the  same  thing  in  the  Dedication  of  his  Translation  of 
Hammond's  Paraphrase  and  Commentary,  to  the  Arminian  Clergy  of  Hol- 
land. 

Profiteri  soletis  in  eucharisticae  coenae  celebratione,  vos  eam  minime  pro 
dissentionis  signo  ac  vexillo  habere,  eosque  dumtaxat  ab  ea  a  vobis  excludi, 
qui  idolatria  sunt  contaminati,  qui  minime  habent  Scripturam  pro  fidei  nor- 
ma,  qui  in  impuris  moribus  sancta  Christi  prsecepta  conculcant,  aut  qui  deni- 
que  alios  religionis  causa  vexant.  Hammond,  a  Cler.  p.  3  Dedicat.  Edit. 
Secund.  1714, 

•t  Unitarian  Miscellany,  Vol.  II.  p.  92. 


164  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  in. 

fundamental,  and  it  Avould  be  a  hard  matter  to  tell 
what  kind  of  a  trinity  they  approved. 

Nor  amonff  Calvinists  and  Trinitarians  of  later 
times  have  there  been  wanting  those,  who  confessed 
the  silence,  or  at  least  the  obscurity  of  the  Bible  on 
this  subject.  The  zealous  and  violently  orthodox 
Jurieu,  who  ranked  a  denial  of  the  trinity  among 
the  oreatest  possible  heresies,  did  not  pretend,  that 
this  doctrine  was  known  in  its  proper  shape  till  the 
council  of  Nice.  He  proves  from  the  ancients,  that, 
during  the  three  first  centuries,  the  opinion  was  uni- 
versal, that  the  Son  was  not  equal  to  the  Father, 
nor  his  existence  of  the  same  duration.* 

Dr.  Watts,  while  he  was  yet  a  Trinitarian,  confes- 
sed, that  our  Saviour  spoke  of  himself  with  reserve, 
Avhen  alluding  to  the  mystery  of  his  nature.  When 
the  young  man  called  Jesus,  good  master^  he  said  in 
reply,  "  Why  callest  thou  me  good  ?  There  is  none 
good  but  one,  and  that  is  God."t  Since  he  chides 
the  young  man  for  ascribing  to  him  an  attribute,  which 
he  tells  him  belongs  only  to  the  Supreme  Being,  no 
words  could  be  more  explicit  in  testifying,  that  he 
was  not  himself  that  Being.  Dr.  Watts  felt  the  dif- 
ficulty, and  ventured  on  the  following  explanation. 
"  Our  Saviour  did  not  choose  to  publish  his  own  di- 
vinity, or  oneness  with  God,  in  plain  and  express 
terms  to  the    people,  but  generally  by  such  methods 

*  Ben  Moid.  Apol.  Vol.  I,  p.  46.  Jortin"s  remarks  on  Ecclesiastical  His^ 
tory,  \'ol  II,  p.  29. 

•  Maul).  XIX,  17. 


LET.  II.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  165 

of  inquiry  and  insinuation.''''*  That  is,  accordino;  to 
this  example,  bj  insinuating^  that  he  was  not  what 
he  actually  was.  And  the  same  will  follow  from 
many  other  parts  of  Scripture,  where,  if  Christ  were 
God,  his  language  was  calculated  to  deceive  the  peo- 
ple. Watts  docs  not  stop  with  the  trinity,  but  ex- 
tends the  designed  ambiguity  of  our  Saviour's  lan- 
guage to  other  doctrines,  and  especially  to  the  atone- 
mient.  When  he  preached  this  doctrine,  says  Watts, 
it  was  "  rather  in  secret  to  his  disciples,  or,  if  in  pub- 
lic, it  was  generally  in  dark  sayings,  and  parables, 
and  mystical  expressions."t  In  most  cases  such  a 
mode  of  explanation  and  defence  would  be  thought 
no  better  than  giving  up  the  point.  Watts,  how- 
ever, in  imitation  of  the  Fathers,  makes  a  merit  of 
his  difficulties,  and  charges  them  all  to  the  prudence 
and  caution  of  the  Saviour.  One  of  the  most  re- 
markable things  about  the  matter  is,  that  he  could 
not  persuade  his  conscience  to  approve  the  exercise 
of  Christian  Charity  towards  those,  who  could  not 
see  as  he  did  this  doctrine  taught  by  the  Saviour  on-» 
ly  in  secret,  in  dark  sayings,  and  mystical  expressions. 
There  never  was  a  more  striking  instance  of  the 
power  of  orthodoxy  to  narrow  the  mind,  and  shut 
up  the  heart.J 

In  Bishop  Smalridge's  Sermon  on  the  Use  of  Rea- 
son, after  speaking  of  the  trinity  as  described  in  the 
Articles,  Liturgy,  and  Creeds,  he  observes,  "  It  must 

*  VV^atts's  Works,  Vol.  HI,  p.  621,  Lond.  1810,  4to. 

V  Watts's  Works,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  63?.  t  Ibid.  p.  578. 


166  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  in. 

be  owned  that  this  doctrine  is  not  in  so  many  words 
taught  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  What  we  profess  in 
our  prayers,  we  nowhere  read  in  Scripture,  that 
the  one  God,  the  one  Lord,  is  not  only  one  person, 
but  three  persons  in  one  substance.  But  although 
these  truths  are  not  read  in  Scripture,  yet  they  may 
easily,  regularly,  and  undeniably  be  inferred  from 
Scripture.  If,  Indeed,  it  can  be  shown,  that  these 
inferences  are  wrong,  they  may  safely  be  rejected."* 
Atterbury  advances  similar  sentiments,  and  seems  to 
think  it  an  advantage  to  Christianity,  that  this  doc- 
trine and  others  should  be  expressed  so  obscurely. 
It  affords  a  trial  of  our  faith,  which  we  could  not 
have,  if  all  were  plain  and  positive  ;  and,  therefore, 
it  is  rather  a  benefit,  than  otherwise,  that  the  trinity 
should  be  partially  and  darkly  made  known  in  the 
Scriptures.t 

Such  have  been  the  opinions  of  many  of  the  most 
learned  and  respectable  Trinitarians  in  all  ages  of 
the  christian  church  ;  they  have  defended  the  trini- 
ty not  on  the  ground  of  its  being  clearly  taught,  but 
solely  as  a  doctrine  of  tradition.,  or  of  inference. 
Some  have  inclined  to  one,  and  some  to  the  other, 
according  to  the  period  and  country  in  which  they 
lived.  When  tradition  was  more  in  vogue  than  at 
present,  this  was  made  to  bear  the  burden  of  proof; 
but  when,  in  the  progress  of  inquiry  and  knowledge, 
this  refuge  of  the  dark  ages  was  stripped  of  its  au- 

*  Smalridge's  Sermons,  Eolio,  p.  348. 

t  Atierbuiy's  Sermons  and  Discourses  on  Several  Subjects  and  Occasions, 
Vol.111,  p.  266,  267. 


!,ET.  n.J  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  167 

thority,  a  broader  foundation  Avas  to  be  sought  out 
for  the  trinity.  The  Bible  was  now  taken  up  in 
earnest  ;  where  the  trinity  was  once  seen  darkly, 
even  by  the  keen  eyes  of  wisdom  and  learning,  it 
now  came  out  in  such  bright  and  imposing  colours  as 
to  be  distinctly  perceived  by  the  shortest  vision  ;  it 
was  discovered  to  be  at  the  bottom  of  every  reli- 
gious truth  ;  from  the  first  verse  of  Genesis  to  the 
last  chapter  of  Revelations,  the  whole  Bible  was  full 
of  the  trinity. 

It  is  worthy  of  special  observation,  however,  that 
it  has  never  been  foimally  defended  as  a  plain  doc- 
trine of  Scripture  ;  nor  in  Christendom  is  there  a 
creed  in  which  it  is  expressed  in  Scripture  language; 
nor  is  it  ever  defined  in  this  language  by  those  who 
are  loudest  in  proclaiming  it  a  plain  Scripture  doc- 
trine. It  is  deduced  by  inference,  and  inference  only. 
When  the  matter  is  brought  to  the  test,  it  is  not 
pretended,  that  Christ  is  ever  called  God,  the  same 
being  as  the  Father,  or  the  Supreme  Jehovah.  All 
that  is  pretended  comes  to  no  more  than  this,  that 
many  things  are  said  of  Christ,  which  it  is  supposed 
could  not  be  said  of  him  if  he  were  not  God.  This 
is  called  an  argument,  and  then  follows  the  inference, 
that  he  was  God.  So  in  regard  to  the  Holy  Spirit, 
to  which  certain  characteristics  are  ascribed,  that 
are  supposed  to  be  peculiar  to  the  Supreme  Being, 
and  hence  comes  the  inference,  that  the  Holy  Spirit 
is  God.  Hitherto  we  have  three  Gods,  and  the  la- 
bour of  inferring  must  be  continued,  or  the  unity 
will  be  destroyed.     It  must  be  inferred,  that  the  Son 


1168  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [fart  in 

is  the  same  being  as  the  Father  ;  and  again  it  must 
be  inferred^  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  same  being 
as  the  Father,  and  also  the  same  being  as  the  Son. 
We  are  now  arrived  at  what  is  called  a  trinity  in 
unity,  and  the  point  has  been  gained  by  building  up 
inference  on  inference  with  very  little  aid  from  the 
express  words  of  Scripture. 

It  is  now  time  to  ask  on  what  authority  such  a 
doctrine  is  set  up  as  a  fundamental  article  of  faith, 
without  believing  which,  no  man  can  be  entitled  to 
the  christian  name,  or  received  into  fellowship.  In 
what  part  of  the  Bible  are  we  encouraged  to  dictate 
our  inferences  to  others,  as  rules  of  faith,  and  guides 
to  salvation  ?  And  if  we  have  any  such  authority, 
why  stop  with  the  inference  of  the  trinity  ?  Surely 
proof  will  not  now  be  demanded,  that  all  truths  neces- 
sary to  salvation  are  taught  with  the  utmost  explicit- 
ness  and  perspicuity  in  the  Scriptures.  The  trinity 
is  not  thus  taught  ;  many  persons  perceive  no  vesti- 
ges of  it ;  others  see  it  but  darkly  ;  to  others  it  is 
enveloped  in  absolute  mystery  ;  and  even  the  most 
sagacious  are  obliged  to  content  themselves  with 
drawing  it  out  by  induction  and  inference.  To  im- 
pose such  an  article  on  others,  as  a  condition  of 
christian  privileges,  is  an  outrage  on  religious  liberty 
and  right,  which  is  met  with  an  am[)le  rebuke  in  the 
instructions  and  exam()ie  of  the  Saviour.  Wliccver 
commits  this  outrage  may  well  be  said,  in  the 
language  of  Whitby,  "  to  be  plainly  gulliy  of  adding 
to  the  word  of  God,  and  making  that  necessary  to 


1,ET,  11.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  169 

salvation,  which  our  one  lawgiver  never  made  so."* 
Let  the  trinity  be  believed  by  those,  who  think  it 
true,  but  let  it  not  be  enforced  as  a  stumbling  block 
to  the  weak,  an  apple  of  discord  to  the  strong,  and 
a  root  of  bitterness  to  all. 

Jeremy  Taylor  speaks  well  to  this  purpose.  He 
grants,  that  any  man  has  a  right  to  extend  his  creed 
as  far  as  he  chooses,  and  that  individuals  and  chur- 
ches may  draw  inferences  from  established  articles 
for  their  own  edification,  but  "  no  such  deduction," 
he  adds,  "  is  fit  to  be  pressed  on  others  as  an  article 
of  faith,  and  every  deduction  which  is  so  made,  un- 
less it  be  such  a  thing  as  is  at  first  evident  to  all,  is 
but  sufficient  to  make  a  human  faith,  nor  can  it 
amount  to  a  divine,  much  less  can  be  obligatory  to 
bind  a  person  of  a  different  persuasion  to  subscribe,  un- 
der pain  of  losing  his  faith,  or  being  a  heretic."  And 
again,  "  if  the  sense  be  uncertain,  we  can  no  more 
be  obliged  to  believe  it  in  a  certain  sense,  than  Ave 
are  to  believe  it  at  all,  if  we  are  not  certain  that  God 
delivered  it.  But  if  it  be  only  certain  that  God 
spoke  it,  and  not  certain  to  Avhat  sense,  our  faith  of 
it  is  to  be  as  indeterminate  as  its  sense,  and  it  can 
be  no  other  in  the  nature  of  the  thing,  nor  is  it  con- 
sonant to  God's  justice  to  believe  of  him,  that  he  can 
or  will  require  more."t  These  views  are  rational; 
they  accord  with  the  nature  of  God,  with  common 
sense,  and  with  Scripture. 

*  Discourse  V,  appended  to  the  La»t  Thoughts,  p.  179. 

•f  Liberty  of  Prophesying,  Sec.  I.     On  the  Nature  of  Faith,  p.  18,  19. 

22 


170  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [fart  hi. 

All  moral  action  is  voluntary ;  force  may  produce 
acquiescence,  but  not  conviction ;  the  bugbear  of 
heresy  and  the  terrors  of  excommunication  may 
make  a  weak  man  a  hypocrite,  but  will  never  con- 
vert a  bad  one  from  the  error  of  his  ways  ;  to  com- 
pel a  man  to  assent  to  a  ti'inity,  which  he  cannot  be- 
heve,  may  hold  him  in  the  ranks  of  orthodoxy,  but 
will  never  reconcile  him  to  the  dominion  of  virtue  ; 
to  convince  him  that  faith  in  a  mystery  is  essential 
to  salvation  may  easily  incite  him  to  be  a  credulous 
bigot,  but  will  not  add  light  or  warmth  to  his  piety, 
nor  activity  to  his  benevolence.  The  trinity  has  a 
mischievous  tendency  by  being  clothed  with  a  facti- 
tious importance,  and  raised  to  a  place  among  chris- 
tian doctrines  to  which  it  has  no  claims  ;  that  is,  if 
we  arc  to  judge  of  the  importance  of  a  doctrine  by 
the  clearness  and  solemnity  with  which  it  is  taught 
in  the  Gospel.  If  true,  as  Trinitarians  believe,  the 
peace  and  prosperity  of  the  church  require,  that  it 
should  be  kept  as  much  out  of  sight  as  in  the  days 
of  the  Saviour  and  the  Apostles.  Instead  of  pro- 
moting conciliation,  harmony,  and  good  fellowship,  it 
is  made  a  source  of  ceaseless  division  and  discord  ; 
and  such  has  always  been  its  consequence  from  the 
time  it  was  first  publicly  introduced  as  an  article  of 
christian  faith. 

As  to  the  origin  of  the  trinity,  it  can  be  ascertain- 
ed with  as  much  precision  as  almost  any  historical 
fact  of  the  primitive  ages  of  Christianity.  It  sprung 
from  several  causes,  and  many  incidental  events  con- 
spired to  bring  it  to  maturity.     Nearly  all  the  early 


tET.  II.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  171 

converts  had  been  heathens,  educated  in  the  wor- 
ship of  deified  men,  as  Ave  11  as  of  gods  of  a  higher 
order.  We  know,  that  the  greatest  scandal,  which 
was  thought  to  rest  on  the  religion  of  Jesus,  was  the 
low  origin  and  ignominious  death  of  its  author  ;  this 
scandal  would  be  removed  by  making  him  a  god  ; 
and  his  extraordinary  works,  and  the  purity  of  his 
life,  gave  him  as  high  a  claim  to  this  distinction,  in 
the  opinion  of  the  heathens,  as  others  who  had  been 
deified.  It  is  certain,  that  some  did  consider  him  in 
this  light  before  their  conversion,  and  it  Avas  quite 
natural,  that  their  prejudice  should  continue  after- 
wards. History  tells  us,  that  Tiberius  proposed  to 
enrol  him  among  the  gods  of  Rome,  and  Avas  pre- 
vented only  by  the  opposition  of  the  senate.* 

Nor  is  it  to  be  forgotten,  that  when  the  council  of 
Nice  decreed,  that  the  Son  Avas  consubstantial  Avith 
the  Father,  a  very  large  portion  of  the  christian 
world  were  gentile  converts.  The  celebrated  Hin- 
doo reformer,  Rammohun  Roy,  whose  name  is  never 
to  be  mentioned  but  with  the  highest  respect  for  his 
character  and  learning,  has  examined  this  subject 
with  acuteness.  He  concludes  his  inquiry  by  saying, 
"  If  some  of  the  heathens,  from  the  nature  of  their 
superstitions,  could  rank  Jesus  among  their  false  gods, 
it  is  no  wonder  if  others,  Avhen  nominally  converted 
to  Christianity,  should  have  placed  him  on  an  equali- 
ty with  the  true  God,  and  should  have  passed  a  de- 
cree, constituting  him  one  of  the  persons  of  the  God- 

*  Moskeim's  Ecclesiastical  History,  Part  I.  chap.  IV.  sec.  7. 


172  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.     '  i  i'ART  in. 

head."*  When  the  deity  of  Christ  had  become  es- 
tabhshed,  the  philosophers  easily  constructed  a  trini- 
ty out  of  the  three  princij)les  of  Plato,  by  yielding 
to  their  Avell  known  propensity  to  make  as  many- 
parts  as  possible  of  the  new  religion  conform  to  their 
old  opinions  ;  and  it  is  not  a  matter  of  surprise, 
that  within  a  century  after  the  council  of  Nice,  an- 
other council  should  decree  the  deity  of  the  Holy 
Spirit. 


LETTER  III. 

Moral  Tendency  of  a  Belief  in  the  Trinity. 

sm, 

As  the  doctrine  of  the  trinity  embraces  no  moral 
precepts,  nor  immediate  rules  of  action,  its  good  or 
evil  tendency  must  depend  on  the  power  it  exerts  in 
giving  a  tone  and  bias  to  the  mind  favourable  or  un- 
favourable to  just  notions  of  the  Deity,  to  the  rece{> 
tion  of  moral  truth,  a  I'everence  for  the  known  laws 
of  God,  a  respect  for  the  voice  of  conscience,  and  a 
liabitual  frame  of  piety  and  benevolence.  It  has  a 
very  remote  bearing,  if  any  at  all,  on  the  clearness 
and  obligation   of   the  preceptive  and  practical  part 

*  Sccoiiil  Appeal  to  the  Chiislian  Pdblic,   in  Defence  of  tlic  Precepts  of 
JcsuR,  p.  170;  printed  at  the  Baptist  Mission  Prosy,  Calcutta,  1821. 


LET.  iri.J  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  173 

of  religion.  Trinitarians  and  Unitarians  are  equally 
convinced  of  the  divine  origin,  and  absolute  truth  of 
every  thing  which  the  Saviour  taught ;  they  equally 
consider  all  his  ordinances  and  precepts  as  imposing 
commands,  which  must  be  implicitly  obeyed.  Hence 
it  is,  that  neither  a  belief,  nor  disbelief  of  the  doc- 
trine has  any  tendency  to  diminish  or  strengthen  the 
authority  of  the  christian  religion,  as  it  relates  to  the 
necessity  of  obedience,  repentance,  reformation,  and 
a  holy  life. 

We  are  not  hence  to  infer,  that  the  trinity  is  an 
error  of  no  consequence.  All  error  is  injurious.  Of 
truth  we  can  say  with  certainty,  that  it  Avill  always 
lead  to  good  ends  ;  error,  on  the  contrary,  however  i 
innocent  in  itself,  must  be  pernicious  in  its  results. 
It  cannot  be  doubted,  that  many  christians  have  been 
good  and  pious  with  erroneous  creeds,  but  it  is  a  case 
equally  indubitable,  that  they  would  have  been  bet- 
ter with  true  ones.  The  criminality,  and  the  evil  of 
error  are  very  different  things ;  a  man  is  compelled 
to  believe  according  to  his  convictions  ;  he  may  be 
deceived ;  many  evils  may  follow  from  this  decep- 
tion, but  no  crime  can  be  attached,  unless  there  has 
been  a  culpable  indolence,  or  a  perverted  will ;  or 
some  unhallowed  purpose  in  forming  opinions.  A 
belief  in  the  trinity  involves  no  crime  ;  its  iniquity 
consists  in  its  evil  consequences  ;  it  obscures  the  per- 
fections of  the  Deity,  obstructs  the  current  of  devo- 
tional feeling,  perplexes  the  humble  inquirer  after 
truth,  and  thus  essentially  impairs  the  means  and 
motives  of  a  rational  worship,  practical  piety  and 
vital  godliness. 


174  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [pari  iw. 

In  the  first  place,  the  notion  of  the  trinity  de- 
stroys the  simpHcity  of  worship,  and  essentially  Aveak- 
ens  all  the  good  etfects,  which  we  may  expect  to 
derive  from  a  pure  and  spiritual  devotion.  If  there 
be  one  precept  in  the  Scriptures,  more  positive  than 
any  other,  it  is,  that  the  undivided  homage  of  men 
is  due  to  ONE  being,  to  the  Supreme.  God  alone.  It 
was  the  command  of  our  Saviour  himself,  "  Thou 
shalt  worship  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  him  only  shalt 
thou  serve."  "  True  worshippers,"  he  tells  us,  "shall 
worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in  truth."*  We 
are  to  adore  and  reverence  him  as  our  Creator,  to 
praise  him  as  the  source  of  all  good,  to  love  and 
thank  him  for  his  paternal  care  and  kindness.  As 
he  is  the  sole  author  of  all  things,  he  is  to  receive 
our  sole  homage,  submission,  gratitude.  In  the  dis- 
pensations of  providence,  and  in  the  christian  religion, 
no  feature  is  so  striking,  as  that  which  manifests  the 
existence  of  one  supreme  object  of  worship,  one  God 
of  infinite  perfections,  who  claims  all  our  services. 

How  do  we  retain  this  great  characteristic  of  our 
religion,  in  what  respect  do  we  obey  the  commands 
of  Christ,  when  we  make  three  objects  of  worship, 
when  we  lift  up  our  voices  in  adoration  and  prayer 
to  three  separate  beings,  and  address  them  each  as 
the  supreme,  self-existent,  independent  God  ?  When 
you  offer  prayers  to  God  the  Father,  God  the  Son, 
God  the  Holy  Ghost,  let  it  be  admitted,  that  you 
do  not  consider  them  three  Gods,  although  each  is 

*  Mauli.  IV,  10.— John  IV,  23. 


LET.  III.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  175 

called  God  ;  you  must,  notwithstanding,  have  a  no- 
tion of  three  distinct  beings  at  the  time  of  your  de- 
votions, and  address  them  as  such.  You  worship 
three  Gods  in  form  and  imagination,  that  is,  in  reali- 
ty, so  far  as  your  conceptions  of  the  Deity  present 
an  object  to  the  understanding. 

You  do  not  see  God,  and  you  must  worship  him 
under  such  properties,  as  you  are  able  to  conceive 
and  combine  to  form  his  nature  and  character.  If 
you  have  in  your  mind  three  separate  beings,  posses- 
sing each  the  same  properties  as  the  others,  and 
address  them  as  separate,  equal  beings,  and  under 
different  titles,  it  is  certain,  that  the  nature  of  your 
worship,  and  its  effects  on  the  mind  and  character, 
will  be  precisely  the  same,  as  if  you  acknowledged 
yourself  to  be  worshipping  three  Gods.  From  this 
kind  of  worship,  two  evils  of  no  common  magnitude 
follow ;  first,  the  crime  of  disobeying  a  divine  com- 
mand, in  not  acting  the  part  of  "  true  worshippers," 
who,  our  Saviour  tells  us,  Avorship  the  Father  ;  se- 
condly, all  the  practical  ill  consequences,  which  flow 
from  having  three  objects  of  religious  worship  instead 
of  one.* 


*  The  following  extract  is  from  the  Litany  used  in  the  Episcopal  Church. 

"  O  God,  the  Father  of  Heaven,  have  mercy  upon  us,  miserable  sinners. 

"O  God,  the  Son,  Redeemer  of  ihe  world,  have  mercy  upon  us,  miserable 
sinners. 

"  O  God,  the  Holy  Ghost,  proceeding  from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  harp 
mercy  upon  us,  miserable  sinners. 

"  O  holy,  blessed,  and  glorious  Trinity,  three  persons  and  one  God,  have 
mercy  upon  us,  miserable  sinners." 

If  v/e  are  to  understand  language  in  its  common  acceptation,  the  above  ex- 
tract inculcates  the  worship  of  four  Gods.     The  Father,  the- Son,  the  Holy 


176  TRINITY    AND  ATONEMENT.  [rARTtlu 

Unitarians  avoid  these  evils  by  adhering  rigidly  to 
simplicity  and  unity  in  their  worship.  With  them, 
God  is  believed  to  be  one  being:  they  worship  him 
in  his  undivided  and  infinitely  perfect  character;  their 
love  and  gratitude,  adoration  and  reverence,  confi- 
dence and  joy,  all  centre  in  him.  They  dare  not 
ascribe  to  any  other  being  the  honours  and  glory, 
which  the  Scriptures  every  where  command  us  to 
render  to  the  Father.  -  They  adore  his  goodness  for 
the  means,  which  he  has  provided  for  our  salvation 
through  the  instructions  of  his  Son.  They  honour 
Christ  as  the  appointed  Saviour,  whom  God  endow- 
ed in  an  eminent  degree  with  the  gifts  of  his  spirit, 
with  the  strength  of  his  power,  with  the  light  of  his 
wisdom  and  truth ;  they  feel  towards  him  all  the 
veneration,  gratitude,  and  affection,  which  his  heaven- 
ly office,  his  sublime  instructions,  his  trials  and  suffer- 
ings justly  demand ;  but  they  do  not  worship  him  as 
God,  because  the  Scriptures  teach,  and  reason  veri- 
fies the  truth,  that  there  is  but  "  one  God,  the  fa- 
ther," who  requires  our  unceasing  and  undivided 
service.  Jesus  himself  always  prayed  to  the  Father, 
and  said  to  his  disciples  in  terms  which  it  Avould 
seem  impossible  to  mistake,  "  in  that  day  ye  shall  ask 
ME  nothing;  whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  the  father  in 
my  name,  he  will  give  it  you."*  Can  you  have  a 
plainer  declaration,  that  the  Father  only  is  to  be 
worshipped?  From  views  like  the  above.  Unitarians 

Spirit,  and  the  Trinity,  are  lieie  worshipped  separately,  and  respectively,  undei 
the  title  of  God. 
*  John  xvi.  23. 


LET.  la.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT,  l?t 

are  strengthened  In  the  behef  that  their  system  of 
faith  is  true,  that  it  has  greatly  the  advantage  of  the 
Trinitarian  scheme  in  securing  a  pure  and  scriptural 
worship,  promoting  love  to  God,  and  kindling  the 
fervour  of  a  steady  piety. 

Again,  the  Trinitarian  faith  not  only  makes  the 
Son  equal  with  the  Father,  sharing  the  same  glory, 
and  entitled  to  the  same  homage  and  love,  but  actu- 
ally raises  him  higher,  and  clothes  him  with  a  more 
adorable,  lovely,  and  beneficent  character.  It  is  an 
important  part  of  this  system,  that  man,  by  trans- 
gression, Avas  "  bound  over  to  the  wrath  of  God,  and 
curse  of  the  law."*  Under  this  state  of  wrath,  the 
Father  was  resolved  to  have  vengeance  on  his  weak 
and  offending  children,  and  would  not  suffer  his  anger 
to  be  appeased  except  by  the  sacrifice  of  the  Son, 
who  offered  himself  a  willing  victim  to  temper  the 
vindictive  rage,  which  threatened  destruction  and 
torment  to  the  whole  human  race.  It  is  to  the  com- 
passion and  benevolence  of  the  Son  alone,  that  we 
are  indebted  for  the  mercy  of  God.  We  owe  it  not 
to  the  purpose  of  the  Father,  that  we  have  not  been 
consumed  by  his  anger;  the  Son  is  the  voluntary, 
the  unassisted  author  of  our  rescue,  and  in  this  cha- 
racter is  worthy  of  our  supreme  homage,  at  the  ex- 
pense of  every  sentiment  and  feeling  of  love,  grati- 
tude, and  reverence,  to  which  God,  acting  the  part 
of  a  Father,  would  be  entitled.  What  good  tenden- 
cy on  the  practical  morals  and  piety  of  christians  do 

*  Confession  of  Faith,  chap,  vi,  {  6, 

23 


178  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  fAi^T  "i- 

you  discover  in  a  doctrine,  which  blots  out  all  the 
moral  attributes  of  the  Deity,  makes  him  an  an- 
gry, vindictive,  and  cruel  being,  and  clothes  another 
with  the  ensigns  of  his  supremacy  and  perfection  ? 
What  do  you  find  in  such  a  doctrine,  which  is  calcu- 
lated to  quicken  devotion,  provoke  to  good  works, 
establish  charity,  or  to  invigorate  any  of  the  christian 
virtues  ? 

Moreover,  the  notion  that  Christ  was  God  destroys 
the  force  of  his  example.  One  of  the  most  encoura- 
ging assurances,  that  the  precepts  of  the  Gospel  are 
suited  to  our  nature,  condition,  and  improvement,  is 
exhibited  in  the  conduct  of  Jesus.  We  read  the  his- 
tory of  his  life,  attend  him  amidst  the  perils  he  en- 
countered, the  sufferings  he  endured ;  we  contem- 
plate with  admiration  the  immaculate  purity  of  his 
character,  his  disregard  of  the  world  and  its  attrac- 
tions; we  behold  his  piety,  benevolence,  meekness, 
forbearance  ;  we  discover  in  his  life  a  perfect  illus- 
tration of  his  doctrines  and  precepts.  To  this  cha- 
racter we  look  as  an  illustrious  model  of  moral  ex- 
cellence, at  once  commanding  our  imitation,  and  serv- 
ing as  a  guide  to  our  steps. 

All  this  is  a  delusion  if  Christ  were  the  Supreme 
God;  no  points  of  resemblance  exist  between  God 
and  man,  from  wliich  the  example  of  the  former  can 
be  made  a  motive  of  action  to  the  latter.  If  Christ 
were  God,  it  cost  him  nothing  to  resist  temptation; 
for  he  could  not  be  tempted.  That  he  refrained 
from  sin  under  many  trying  circumstances  is  no  proof, 
that  we  can  refrain  under  similar  ones.      According 


LET.  iri.J  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  179 

to  the  Trinitarian  theory,  therefore,  the  example  of 
Christ  was  totally  without  value,  for  it  was  impossi- 
ble for  him  to  be  any  other  than  a  holy  being ;  and 
in  practising  his  exalted  virtues  he  was  only  yielding 
a  necessary  compliance  with  the  principles  and  laws 
of  his  nature. 

This  result  is  adverse  to  the  account  given  by  the 
Apostles.  St.  Paul  says,  "  It  behooved  him  to  be 
made  in  all  things  like  unto  his  brethren  ;"  and  that, 
"  he  was  in  all  points  tempted  like  as  we  are."*  In 
this  character  his  spotless  example  is  such  as  we  mar- 
aud ought  to  follow.  He  was  made  like  us,  "  touch- 
ed with  the  feelings  of  our  infirmities,"  tempted  as 
we  are,  and  exposed  to  the  same  evils  and  trials.  He 
was  without  sin,  not  because  it  was  impossible  for 
him  to  sin,  but  because  he  exercised  with  an  unfail- 
ing resolution  and  firmness  the  power  he  possessed  of 
resisting  temptation,  moderating  his  desires,  and  com- 
plying with  all  the  divine  laws ;  the  perfection  of  his 
character  consisted  in  his  deeds  of  active  piety  and 
goodness.  All  men  have  a  similar  power,  and  are 
capable  of  similar  deeds ;  not  in  the  same  degree, 
but  of  the  same  kind.  Hence  the  example  of  Christ 
is  adapted  to  the  human  condition,  and  affords  a  mo- 
tive to  the  obedience  of  his  laws ;  the  moment  you 
suppose  him  to  be  God,  the  example  and  the  motive 
vanish. 

Much  ingenuity  has  been  exercised  in  attempts  to 
remove  this  difficult}^,  by  striving  to  make  it  appear, 

*  Heb.  ii.  17,  iv.  15. 


180  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [rART  in. 

that  Christ  was  God  and  man  united;  but  even  ad- 
mitting the  fact  of  this  inexphcable  union,  which 
seems  to  have  been  at  first  devised  for  the  purpose 
of  reconcihng  discrepances,  it  does  not  take  away  the 
difficulty  in  the  present  instance.  The  Apostle 
speaks  of  "owe  Lord  Jesus  Christ,*'  and  of  "  one  me- 
diator between  God  and  men."  However  his  nature 
was  constituted,  he  was  one  being.  If  he  was  God, 
he  must  have  possessed  all  the  attributes  and  perfec- 
tions of  God  ;  if  he  could  be  tempted  in  his  human 
nature,  he  possessed  an  unlimited  power  of  resistance 
in  the  divine,  a  power,  which  no  human  bemg,  nor 
any  other  being  but  God,  could  possess.  His  per- 
fection as  God  could  not  be  obscured  by  adding  the 
human  nature ;  nor  by  this  appendage  was  he  brought 
any  nearer  in  his  moral  attributes  and  capacity  to 
the  condition  of  man.  It  is  still  the  example  of  God, 
which  we  behold  in  his  life,  an  example,  which  we 
have  neither  power  nor  hope  to  nnitate. 

This  doctrine  of  two  natures,  which  is  a  main  prop 
in  the  edifice  of  the  trinity,  is  not  every  where  so 
passive  and  inefficient.  It  fails  of  any  good  etfects 
where  its  aid  is  most  needed  by  its  advocates ;  in 
other  quarters  it  is  active  and  desolating ;  it  renders 
useless  all  rules  of  interpretation,  and  makes  the  lan- 
guage of  Christ  ambiguous  and  contradictory.  It  re- 
presents him  as  speaking  in  two  characters,  some- 
times as  God,  sometimes  as  "man,  without  intimating 
in  which  character.  Pursue  this  notion  to  its  conse- 
quences ;  as  man  he  might  be  mistaken  like  other 
KTien  ;  he  has  in  no  single   instance  given  a  hint  by 


LET.  HI.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  181 

which  we  can  be  certain  in  which  character  he 
spoke,  but  he  uniformly  acted  and  conversed  as  one 
being,  possessed  of  one  nature,  and  sustaining  one 
character.  By  what  rule  shall  Ave  judge  ?  One  reads 
his  words,  and  says  it  is  God  that  speaks ;  another 
says  it  is  man.  Who  shall  decide  ?  Or  how  shall  it 
be  proved,  that  he  did  not  utter  the  language,  and 
speak  with  the  wisdom  of  man  only,  when  he  pub- 
lished the  doctrine  of  a  future  state,  or  any  other  of 
the  doctrines  of  revelation.  Do  you  say,  that  the  di- 
vine nature  always  controlled  the  human  in  these 
cases  ?  How  do  you  know?  You  can  only  decide  by 
your  arbitrary  opinion,  and  every  man  may  do  the 
same.  That  is,  no  other  rule  appears  than  the  fancy, 
caprice,  and  prejudices  of  men.  In  short,  this  doc- 
trine of  the  double  nature  of  Christ  introduces  un- 
certainty and  confusion  into  the  whole  scheme  of 
revelation;  it  leaves  no  safe  ground  for  the  humble 
christian  to  stand  on ;  it  carries  destruction  equally 
to  the  moral  precepts,  and  revealed  doctrines  of  the 
gospel. 

Trinitarians  are  apt  to  dwell  much  on  the  humility 
of  Christ  in  descending  from  the  glory  of  the  hea- 
vens, taking  up  his  abode  with  men,  submitting  to 
the  pains  and  hardships  of  a  life  of  sufferings  on 
earth,  for  the  noble  and  benevolent  purpose  of  pro- 
curing the  salvation  of  mankind.  They  make  this  a 
ground  of  love  and  affectionate  gratitude,  and  con- 
ceive that  the  ardour  and  effects  of  their  emotions 
are  much  increased,  by  the  conviction  of  the  supreme 
deity  of  Christ.      But  how  can  they  talk  of  the  hu- 


182  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  m, 

mility  of  the  unchangeable  God  ?  Can  the  Being  who 
is  the  same  from  everlasting  to  everlasting,  and 
whose  perfections  are  as  immutable  as  his  nature, 
can  such  a  Being  humble  himself,  lay  aside  his  attri- 
butes, and  take  upon  him  the  nature  of  a  frail,  sinful 
man  ?  Such  a  supposition  is  at  war  with  every  dic- 
tate of  the  understanding,  and  every  feeling  of  the 
heart  ;  in  this  view  the  humiliation  of  Christ  is  ima- 
ginary ;  it  is  impossible ;  it  affords  no  rational  incite- 
ments of  love,  sympathy,  or  gratitude.  But  "  it  is 
our  belief,  that  Christ's  humiliation  Avas  real  and  en- 
tire, that  the  whole  Saviour,  and  not  a  part  of  him, 
suffered,  that  his  crucifixion  was  a  scene  of  deep  and 
unmixed  agony.  As  we  stand  round  his  cross,  our 
minds  are  not  distracted,  nor  our  sensibility  weaken- 
ed, by  contemplating  him  as  composed  of  incongru- 
ous and  infinitely  differing  minds,  and  as  having  a 
balance  of  infinite  felicity.  We  recognize,  in  the 
dying  Jesus,  but  one  mind.  This,  we  think,  renders 
his  sutferings,  and  his  patience  and  love  in  bearing 
them,  incomparably  more  impressive  and  affecting, 
than  the  system  v/e  oppose."*  Here  are  just  and 
forcible  reasons  for  being  deeply  affected  with  the 
humiliation  and  sufferings  of  Christ ;  we  consider 
him  a  beuig  who  was  capable  of  suffering,  and  who 
voluntarily  submitted  to  it  for  our  sake. 

One  reason  more  shall  be  added,  why  the  trinity 
has  an  unfavourajjle  tendency  with  respect  to  piety 
and  moral  excellence.     It  is  allowed  by  all  christians, 

*'  Rev.  Dr.  Cliainiiiig's  Orclinution  Sermon  at  Baltimore,  p.  2t>. 


1-ET.  III.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  183 

that  a  special  object  of  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus,  was 
to  make  known  and  confirm  the  certainty  of  a  future 
state,  to  open  the  prospects  of  immortahty,  and  to  fit 
men  for  an  existence  in  another  world.  All  our 
hopes  as  christians  are  built  on  the  belief  of  a  resur- 
rection of  the  dead,  and  another  state  of  being. 
Whence  do  we  derive  this  belief?  Wholly  from  the 
death  and  resurrection  of  Christ ;  according  to  the 
reasoning  of  the  apostle,  "  If  there  be  no  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead,  then  is  Christ  not  risen;  and  if 
Christ  be  not  risen,  then  is  our  preaching  vain,  and 
your  faith  is  also  vain.  Yea,  and  we  are  found  false 
witnesses  of  God ;  because  we  have  testified  of  God, 
that  he  raised  up  Christ ;  whom  he  raised  not  up,  if 
so  be  the  dead  rise  not."*  Here,  it  seems,  the  re- 
surrection of  men  is  argued  from  the  resurrection  of 
Christ.  What  force  would  be  in  this  argument,  if 
Christ  were  God;  or  what  possible  reason  should 
we  have  for  the  consoling  belief,  that  we  shall  re- 
vive from  the  sleep  of  death,  because  he  has  reviv- 
ed, "  and  become  the  first  fruits  of  them  that  slept  ?" 
For  if  God,  or,  which  is  the  same  thing,  a  person  who 
was  truly  God,  could  have  died  and  arisen  from  the 
dead,  Ave  cannot  hence  infer,  that  we  shall  rise,  any 
more  than  that  we  can  create  ourselves  anew,  or  do 
any  other  act  of  omnipotence.  Take  the  character 
which  the  Apostle  gives  of  Christ ;  consider  him  as 
subject  from  his  nature  to  suffering  and  death,  as  act- 
ing by  the  power  of  the  Father,  and  not  of  himself; 

*  1  Cor.  XV.  13, 14, 15, 


184  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMEJNT.  [part  iiu 

believe  his  own  words  when  he  speaks  of  his  depen- 
dence, his  limited  knowledge  and  faculties  ;  the  argu- 
ment then  becomes  an  irresistible  one.  As  God  rais- 
ed him  from  the  dead,  we  have  as  convincing  a  proof 
as  we  can  have,  that  he  will  raise  us  likewise  ;  and 
on  this  substantial  ground  rests  our  hope  of  future 
safety  and  glory. 

The  weight  and  value  of  this  argument  are  in- 
creased, when  it  is  considered  as  furnishing  a  motive 
to  obedience  and  holiness.  If  any  thing  will  subdue 
the  hardness  of  the  sinner's  heart,  and  awaken  him 
to  a  sense  of  the  folly  and  danger  of  sin ;  if  any  thing 
will  quicken  the  sensibility  of  conscience,  and  impress 
the  laws  of  heaven  on  the  understanding,  it  is  the 
certainty  of  a  future  judgment,  a  state  of  being  where 
justice  will  raise  her  impartial  scales,  and  award  to 
each  the  precise  measure  of  his  deserts.  The 
strength  of  this  motive,  and  its  influence  on  the  mind 
and  practice  of  every  individual,  will  be  in  exact 
proportion  to  the  conviction  he  feels,  that  the  soul 
will  exist  hereafter,  receive  a  just  retribution  from 
its  maker,  know  the  pains  of  depravity  and  vice,  and 
the  joys  of  conscious  innocence  and  purity.  The 
system  of  faith,  which  adds  the  greatest  force  to  the 
argument  for  a  resurrection,  will  be  the  best  calcu- 
lated to  give  efficacy  to  this  motive,  and  thus  advance 
the  great  purpose  of  the  christian  religion ;  but  from 
what  has  been  said,  it  is  quite  obvious  that  the  trini- 
ty, even  if  it  be  true,  lends  no  help  to  such  a  system. 

I  have  thus  taken  a  short  view  of  the  influence  of 
(he  trinity  on  some  of  the  prominent  principles  of 


i,ET.  III.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  185 

christian  faith  and  practice.  With  what  accuracy- 
it  has  been  done,  I  wilhngly  leave  to  be  decided  by 
the  candour  and  judgment  of  every  reader ;  I  have 
been  obHged  to  content  myself  with  hints  only,  but 
they  embrace  a  compass  of  argument,  in  which  may 
be  included  almost  every  branch  and  article  of  the  or- 
thodox faith.  The  trinity  is  a  kind  of  trunk,  which 
gives  being  and  nourishment  to  the  whole  ;  and  to 
me  it  would  seem,  that  the  evil  consequences  of  this 
doctrine,  if  they  were  not  checked  by  others  more 
rational  in  their  nature,  and  practical  in  their  tenden- 
cy, would  overthrow  the  whole  system  of  revela- 
tion, and  leave  nothing  but  a  heartless  infidelity  or 
gloomy  skepticism  behind.  The  doctrine  of  the  di- 
vine unity,  in  its  simple  form,  is  encumbered  with 
none  of  these  evils  ;  it  admits  the  authority  of  Jesus, 
and  all  he  has  revealed,  taught,  commanded,  and  pro- 
mised, to  operate  with  undiminished  power  on  the 
understanding  and  affections  of  believers. 


24 


186  TRmiTY  AJND  ATONEMEIST.  [part  hi. 


LETTER  IV. 

General  Remarks  on  the  Doctrine  of  Atonement^  with 
a  brief  Outline  of  the  Opinions  of  Unitarians  on  this 
Subject. 

SIR, 

Among  the  articles,  which  you  enumerate  as  con- 
stituting the  essence  of  Christianity,  is  the  doctrine  of 
atonement.  Whatever  may  be  thought  of  any  doc- 
trine called  by  this  name,  all  christians  must  allow, 
that  the  object,  which  it  is  supposed  to  accomplish, 
is  of  the  greatest  importance.  To  one,  who  believes 
with  confidence  and  joy  in  the  divine  origin  and  truth 
of  the  Gospel  dispensation,  no  subject  can  be  more 
solemn,  none  more  interesting,  than  that  relating  to 
salvation  through  Jesus  Christ.  Whoever  believes 
in  him  as  the  Son  of  God,  the  Mediator  between 
God  and  men,  and  whoever  receives  the  truths  of 
his  revelation,  as  the  truths  of  heaven,  must  believe, 
that  the  sole  purpose  of  his  coming  into  the  world 
was  to  redeem  men  from  iniquity,  to  save  them 
from  sin,  to  reconcile  them  to  God,  and  procure 
the  divine  pardon  and  favour. 

If  the  subject  be  viewed  at  large,  as  intimately 
connected  with  the  doctrine  of  salvation  through  the 
agency  of  Jesus  Christ,  every  sincere  believer  in  him 


r.KT.iv.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  187 

must  be  impressed  with  nearly  an  equal  sense  of  its 
importance.  Every  such  believer  will  study  the 
Scriptures  earnestly  and  devoutly  to  know  wherein 
Christ  is  a  Saviour,  or  in  what  salvation  through  him 
consists ;  that  is,  to  know  the  terms  on  Avhich  Jesus 
and  his  Apostles  have  declared,  that  the  sins  of  men 
shall  be  forgiven,  and  final  acceptance  with  God 
shall  be  gained.  In  the  strength  of  this  faith,  in  the 
desire  of  this  knowledge,  and  in  the  ardour  of  inqui- 
ry, it  has  not  been  made  to  appear,  nor  can  it  be 
made  to  appear,  that  Unitarians  are  in  any  degree 
behind  the  orthodox. 

They  are  often  charged  with  denying  the  doctrine 
of  atonement,  and  assailed  with  great  Avarmth  by 
their  opponents  for  this  supposed  defect  of  faith,  or 
perverseness  of  will.  The  persons,  by  whom  this 
charge  is  preferred,  no  doubt  deserve  the  credit  of 
sincerity  and  zeal,  and  their  solicitude  ought  to  be 
considered  praiseworthy,  when  it  makes  no  trespass 
on  the  christian  virtues  of  humility  and  charity.  But 
most  unfortunately,  this  trespass  has  too  often  been 
the  besetting  fault  of  those  anxious  guardians  of  the 
true  faith,  whose  benevolent  concern  has  prompted 
them  to  so  unwelcome  a  task,  as  that  of  passing  cen- 
sure and  lifting  up  the  voice  of  reprobation  against 
others.  Moderation,  respect  for  the  understanding 
of  others,  charity  for  their  weakness,  and  proper  re- 
gard for  their  motives  and  sense  of  duty,  seem  scarce- 
ly to  mingle  with  the  virtues  which  our  opponents 
allow  themselves  to  harbour  and  practise,  when  they 
are  once  embarked  in  this  undertaking.     They  as- 


188  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

sume  a  tone,  and  take  a  liberty,  which,  in  fallible 
men,  can  hardly  be  accounted  for  without  supposing 
them  really  to  believe  all  truth,  wisdom,  and  honesty 
to  be  on  their  side.  Under  such  circumstances,  it  is 
not  surprising,  that  zeal  should  frequently  overleap 
the  bounds  of  knowledge,  and  the  current  of  imagina- 
tion and  feeling,  heightened  by  the  pride  of  self  esti- 
mation, should  carry  away  the  landmarks  of  good 
sense  and  sound  judgment.  Let  it  be  allowed  as  pos- 
sible, that  Unitarians  have  the  use  of  their  under- 
standing, and  entertain  opinions  on  this  subject,  which 
they  value  as  most  sacred  truths,  the  grounds  of  pre- 
sent consolation  and  of  future  hope  ;  let  this  be  al- 
lowed, and  there  would  certainly  be  some  room  for 
moderation  even  amidst  the  bright  burnings  of  zeal, 
some  space  for  considerate  thought  and  gentle  for- 
bearance even  in  the  troubled  tide  of  feeling  and 
passion. 

But  without  daring  to  hope  for  so  happy  a  result, 
it  may  not  be  amiss  to  glance  for  a  moment  at  the 
actual  grounds  and  consistency  of  this  charge  of  crime, 
which  has  been  brought  forward  with  so  much  confi- 
dence, and  pressed  with  so  much  heat  against  Unita- 
rians, for  not  believing  what  the  orthodox  call  the 
atonement.  To  what,  in  its  most  aggravated  shape, 
does  it  amount  ?  In  what  respect  does  it  affect  the 
christian  character  ? 

In  the  first  place,  the  charge  rests  on  the  principle, 
that  the  doctrine  of  atonement  is  of  such  a  peculiar 
kind,  as  to  render  a  beUrfm  it  absolutely  essential  to 
salvation.     Now  it  cannot  be  supposed,  that  serious 


f.ET.  iv.J  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  189 

Unitarians  feel  less  concern  about  the  salvation  of 
their  souls,  and  the  means  of  attaining  this  salvation, 
than  serious  Trinitarians;  yet,  by  no  depth  of  search 
are  they  able  to  find,  either  in  the  reason  of  the 
thing,  or  in  the  Scriptures,  that  such  a  faith,  as  an 
abstract  article  of  belief,  is  essential  to  a  saving 
knowledge  of  the  christian  truths.  What  shall  they 
do?  Would  you  have  them  violate  conscience,  per- 
vert the  word  of  God,  blot  out  the  sense  of  right, 
and  refuse  assent  to  their  judgment,  that  they  may 
admit  a  position,  involving  sacred  and  important  con- 
sequences, in  defiance  of  reason  and  every  moral  and 
religious  principle  ?  The  charge  implies  the  neces- 
sity of  such  an  act  on  their  part,  and  I  submit  to  you, 
whether  this  would  be  more  likely  to  increase  or 
diminish  the  measure  of  religious  attainments,  which 
they  already  possess. 

Agam,  if  no  one  can  be  saved,  who  does  not  be- 
lieve in  the  atonement,  must  it  not  be  settled  what 
this  faith  in  the  atonement  is  ?  Must  not  this  be 
single,  or  the  same  in  every  individual  ?  Or  has 
this  kind  of  faith  various  degrees  and  certain  limits, 
within  which  whosoever  comes  will  be  secure  ?  If 
so,  where  are  these  limits  ?  If  not,  which  is  the 
identical  kind  of  faith  on  which  you  would  impress 
the  stamp  of  safety  ?  When  you  come  to  particu- 
lars, nothing  is  more  obvious,  than  the  total  disagree- 
ment of  the  orthodox  themselves.  They  agree  in 
telling  you,  that  they  look  for  salvation  through  the 
merits  of  Christ  ;  but  when  inquiry  is  made  about 
the  nature  of  these  merits^  the  means  and  manner  of 


190  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi, 

this  salvation,  you  discover  almost  as  many  notions 
and  theories  as  individuals.  Every  one  has  a  faith 
peculiar  to  himself,  marked  in  some  respects  with 
very  broad  distinctions.  Yet  there  can  be  but  one 
true  bclief'in  the  atonement,  and  if  any  one  be  essen- 
tial to  salvation  it  must  be  this.  It  follows,  that  no 
such  importance  belongs  to  faith  in  the  atonement, 
as  the  advocates  of  this  doctrine  attach  to  it  ;  or  if 
it  do,  as  difference  always  implies  error,  no  one  even 
among  the  orthodox  can  justly  hope  for  salvation, 
since  it  is  by  no  means  probable,  that  God  has  made 
a  belief  in  error  a  requisite  to  the  rewards  of  his 
glory.  The  inference  is,  that  our  opponents  are  un- 
reasonable in  the  alarms,  which  they  raise  ;  and  if 
there  be  any  truth  in  the  principle  on  which  they 
act,  it  is  much  more  important  for  them  to  bestow 
their  concern  on  themselves,  and  endeavour  to  cor- 
rect their  own  faith,  than  to  bewail  the  unhappy  lot 
of  Unitarians  for  not  believing  things,  to  which  their 
conscience  and  understanding  cannot  be  forced  to 
assent. 

I  know  not  why  a  rule  should  be  followed  in  re- 
gard to  this  doctrine,  which  will  not  apply  to  every 
other  article  of  faith  ;  and  certainly,  till  the  moral 
attributes  of  God,  and  the  moral  agency  of  man  be 
destroyed,  it  can  never  be  made  a  condition  of  fa- 
vour with  the  Almighty,  that  a  man  shall  believe 
what  he  cannot  believe.  We  have  derived  from  our 
Maker  the  faculties  by  which  we  are  enabled  to 
think,  investigate,  and  draw  conclusions  ;  we  are  ac- 
countable to  him  for  the  right  use  of    these  facul- 


LET.  IV.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  191 

ties,  but  not  for  their  strength,  nor  the  degree  of 
natural  light  which  they  afford.  Whoever  seeks 
truth  conscientiously,  will  be  rewarded  for  his  search, 
although  he  may  fail  of  his  object  ;  and  this  is  no 
less  true  of  the  atonement,  than  of  other  points  of 
faith.  When  it  can  be  proved,  that  Unitarians  do 
not  thus  seek,  that  they  have  less  concern  for  their 
own  spiritual  welfare  than  others  have  for  them  ; 
when  it  can  be  proved,  that  in  them  the  principles 
of  human  nature  are  inverted,  inducing  them  to  pre- 
fer misery  to  happiness,  fatal  error  to  saving  truth, 
the  blind  paths  of  ignorance  to  the  open  fields  of 
knowledge,  the  threatening  terrors  of  perdition  to 
the  glorious  prospects  of  lieaven  ;  when  these  things 
can  be  proved,  then  may  it  be  accounted  a  crime  in 
them  not  to  believe  what  they  cannot  believe,  and 
to  rely  on  the  mercy  and  goodness  of  God,  rather 
than  the  frail  supports  with  which  their  brethren 
would  prop  them  up.  All  they  ask  in  respect  to 
their  faith  is,  to  be  judged  by  their  sincerity,  their 
humble  efforts,  their  righteous  intentions.  When 
these  do  not  appear,  let  them  be  condemned  ;  when 
they  do,  let  the  breath  of  slander  be  hushed,  the 
pride  of  imagined  infallibility  humbled,  the  tone  of 
haughty  rebuke  subdued,  the  voice  of  censure  si- 
lenced. 

In.  the  remarks  about  to  be  made,  it  Avill  not  come 
within  my  purpose  to  examine  the  arguments  on 
which  the  doctrine  of  atonement,  as  it  is  understood 
in  any  particular  sense,  is  supposed  to  be  founded. 
My  attention  will  be  chiefly  directed  to  the  nature,  rea- 


192  TRINITY    AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  ni. 

sonableness,  and  tendency  of  what  is  called  the  popular 
doctrine,  as  explained  by  its  advocates,  with  the  parti- 
cular object  o^  tracing  its  moral  and  religious  injluence, 
and  comparing  it  with  the  same  injluence  of  a  different 
faith.  Unitarians  believe  in  salvation  through  Jesus 
Christ,  as  firmly  and  joyfully  as  persons  of  any  other 
religious  persuasion  ;  and  the  question  is,  whether 
their  mode  of  viewing  and  explaining  this  subject,  be 
not  as  purifying  in  its  nature,  powerful  in  its  action, 
and  certain  and  salutary  in  its  etFects,  as  the  doctrine 
under  consideration  ? 

Before  I  engage  in  this  chief  branch  of  the  sub- 
ject, it  will  be  proper  to  ascertain,  as  far  as  possible, 
what  is  meant  by  the  atonement ;  and  to  draw,  with 
some  precision,  the  line  of  difference  between  those 
who  are  said  to  believe,  and  those  who  disbelieve 
this  doctrine. 

It  is  common,  nay,  if  I  mistake  not,  universal  with 
the  orthodox,  to  represent  Unitarians  as  putting  no 
reliance  on  the  death  of  Christ,  making  this  event  of 
no  value  in  procuring  salvation,  and  not  admitting 
any  merit  or  efficacy  in  his  sufferings,  but  depending 
on  their  own  exertions  alone  for  reconciliation  with 
God.  This  representation  is  essentially  false.  They 
do  not  all  agree  in  opinion  any  more  than  Trinita- 
rians, yet  it  may  be  asserted,  as  a  universal  and  fun- 
damental principle  of  their  faith,  that  the  death  of 
Christ  was  in  the  highest  degree  important  in  esta- 
blishing the  Gospel  scheme  ;  so  important,  indeed, 
that  without  it  his  reJigion  could  never  have  been  in- 
troduced, nor  its  benefits  enjoyed.     In  regard  to  the 


LET.  IV.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  193 

particular  effects  arising  from  his  death,  its  efficacy, 
and  the  extent  of  its  influence,  they  have  differen- 
ces of  opinion,  but  none  which  interferes  with  the 
principle  above  stated  ;  nor  in  these  respects  do  they 
differ  so  much  as  Trinitarians.* 

That  I  may  not  be  misunderstood,  and  that  this 
subject  may  be  placed  in  a  clear  light,  it  will  be  of 
service  to  make  a  short  inquiry  into  the  actual  state 
of'  opinions  among  both  Unitarians  and  Trinitarians. 
This  can  be  fairly  and  satisfactorily  done,  by  intro- 
ducing examples  from  works  of  authority  on  both 
sides.      I  will  begin  with  Unitarians. 

It  was  the  faith  of  the  old  Polish  Socinian  Churches, 
and  no  doubt  of  Unitarians  generally  at  that  period 
on  the  continent  of  Europe,  "  That  Christ,  by  the  di- 
vine will  and  purpose,  suffered  for  our  sins,  and  un- 
derwent a  bloody  death  for  an  expiatory  sacrijice.''^1i 
According  to  their  views,  Christ  was  sent  to  be  apro- 

*  Dr.  Carpenter  observes,  "  Great  stress  is  obviously  laid  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment on  the  death  of  Christ,  as  a  means  of  delivering  men  from  their  sins  and 
of  reconciling  them  to  God.  I  never  met  with  any  christian  who  denied  the 
great  importance  of  that  event."  Unitananism  the  Doctrine  of  the  Gospel, 
p.  296. 

t  Racovian  Catechism,  Sec.  v.  chap.  8.  Again,  in  the  same  chapter,  it  is 
said,  "  Christ  has  by  the  will  of  God,  shed  his  blood  for  the  sins  of  all  men  ; 
wherefore,  whoever  would  experience  God  propitious,  and  obtain  the  forgive- 
ness of  his  sins,  must  come  to  Christ  through  faith  in  him.  This  is  the  only 
refugRofall  sinners." 

By  an  expiatory  sacrifice  is  meant  a  sacrifice,  which  takes  away  sin.  Ex- 
piation ainA  propitiation  are  used,  as  far  as  I  can  discover,  by  all  writers  on 
this  subject,  in  nearly  the  same  sense.  The  Greek  word  'i\atr/AO(  is  twice  found 
in  the  New  Testament,  (John  ii.  2;  iv.  10.)  and  in  each  place  is  rendered  pro- 
pitiation,  and  means  a  deliverance  from  the  guilt  of  sin.  Neither  the  term  ex- 
piation, x\ox  propitiation,  has  any  regard  to  the  nature  of  the  deliverance,  or 
to  the  reasons  for  which  it  is  granted. 

2r) 


194  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  in, 

pitiation  for  the  sins  of  men ;  they  believed  in  the 
atonement,  or  in  the  reconciliation  of  sinners  to  God, 
"through  faith  in  the  blood  of  Christ,"  and  by  his 
agency  as  our  mediator  and  redeemer.  This  is  re- 
peatedly declared  in  the  Racovian  Catechism,  and  in 
other  works  of  the  most  distinguished  writers  of  the 
Polish  Unitarian  Churches.  Socinus  wrote  largely 
on  this  subject.  In  one  place,  after  answering  certain 
charges,  he  adds,  speaking  of  himself;  "  Not  that  he 
denies  Christ  to  have  died,  that  our  sins  may  be  blot- 
ted out,ybr  he  confesses  this  truth  as  most  certain,  and 
glories  in  it.  And  he  readily  allows  not  only,  that 
the  death  of  Christ,  and  the  shedding  of  his  blood 
for  us,  were  an  offering  and  a  sacrifice  for  a  sweet 
smelling  savour  to  God,  as  Paul  expresses  it,  but  also, 
that  this  sacrifice  may  be  said  to  have  been  offered 
for  our  sins,  that  is,  for  this  end,  that  our  sins  might 
be  blotted  out  and  remitted."*  Quotations  to  this 
effect  might  be  multiplied  from  Socinus,  Crellius, 
Slichtingius,  Wolzogcnius,  Wissowatius,  and  other  em- 
inent writers  of  their  time. 

The  sentiments  of  the  Unitarians  at  the  present 
day  in  Geneva  and  Switzerland,  may  be  seen  in  the 
Catechism  used  in  their  churches.  Three  purposes 
are  said  in  that  Catechism  to  be  ansvv^ered  by  the 
death  of  Christ,  namely,  "  To  confirm  his  doctrine ; 
to  give  an  example  of  the  sublimest  virtues ;  and  to 
expiate  our  sins^     And  again  we  arc  told,  that  "  The 

■*  Noil  iiutein  ut  neget  idciico  moiiturum  esse,  etc.  Vid.  Socin.  Oper.  Tom. 
ii,  /;.  445.  Tor  u  well  digested  account  of  the  opinions  of  Socinus  "  On  the 
Dcalli  of  Ciiiist,  and  its  Elficacy,"scc  Toubnin's  Life  ofSocitms,]).  173— 2U9. 


iET.  iv.J  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  195 

death  of  Christ  is  to  be  regarded  at  all  times,  as  the 
only  sacrifice  capable  of  obtaining  from  God  the  par- 
don of  our  sins  "*  In  support  of  these  views,  seve- 
ral passages  of  Scripture  are  quoted,  especially  those 
which  speak  of  the  death  of  Christ  as  procuring  a 
propitiation,  or  remission  of  sins. 

Respecting  the  opinions  of  the  early  English  Uni- 
tarians, no  authority  is  better,  probably,  than  that  of 
Emlyn.  From  him  we  learn  that  they  were  nearly, 
if  not  entirely  the  same,  as  with  the  Unitarians  on 
the  continent.  In  alluding  to  their  opinions,  he  would 
seem  to  adopt  them  as  his  own.  He  believed,  that 
the  sacrifice  of  Christ  was  "an  acceptable  and  re- 
wardable  oblation  to  God,"  in  consideration  of  which 
his  intercessions  in  his  exalted  state  are  made  effectu- 
al, through  his  mediation  with  the  Father,  to  pro- 
cure  pardon   for    the    sins  of   men.t      Dr.   Samuel 

*  Geneva  Catechism,  Part  II.  Sec.  9. 

t  See  Emlyn'sWorks,  Vol.ii.p,  44— 46.  Emlyn  supposed  that  Cliiist's  ohc- 
dience,  even  to  the  death  of  the  cross,  as  the  Apostle  expresses  it,  (Phil.  ii.  8) 
was  an  act,  "  with  which  the  holy  God  was  so  pleased,  that  he  exalted  him  to 
his  right  hand,  and  constituted  him  the  only  advocate,  through  whose  media- 
tion he  would  grant  pardon  and  other  favours  to  repenting  sinners."     p.  102. 

Such  was  the  opinion  also  of  the  old  Polish  Unitarians,  and.  their  immediate 
followers.  "By  this  event,"  [the  death  of  Christ]  says  B.  Wissowatiu?, 
"and  his  obedience  to  God  the  Father,  he  was  invested  with  supreme  power 
over  all  things,  and  thus  obtained  a  full  right  to  forgive  our  sins  and  bless  us 
with  eternal  life.  He  may  therefore  justly  be  said  to  have  redeemed  and 
purchased  us  with  his  blood."    Racov.  Cat.  p.  313,  note, 

W^illiam  Penn's  views  did  notdiffer  materially  from  those  of  other  Unitarians 
at  that  period,  if  we  may  be  allowed  to  judge  from  his  remarks  in  The  Handy 
Foundation  SItaken,  where  he  professes  to  "  confute  from  Scripture  and  right 
Pieason  the  Vulgar  Doctrine  of  Satisfaction,  and  Justification  by  an  iniput.i 
tive  Rigliteousness."     See,  Works,  3d  Ed,  Vol,  \.p.  19. 


196  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  in. 

Clarke  believed,  "  that  the  death  of  Christ  was  ne- 
cessary to  make  the  pardon  of  sin  consistent  with  the 
wisdom  of  God,  in  his  good  government  of  the  world, 
and  to  be  a  proper  attestation  of  his  irreconcileable 
hatred  against  all  unrighteousness."*  The  sentiments 
of  Henry  Taylor  corresponded  with  those  of  Emlyn. 
He  believed  Christ,  by  his  sufferings  and  death,  to 
have  merited  and  received  of  God  the  power  of  con- 
ferring salvation  and  eternal  life  on  all,  who  prove 
by  a  sincere  repentence,  and  a  right  conduct,  that 
they  accept  the  conditions  of  his  Gospel.t 

John  Taylor  held  the  death  of  Christ  to  be  an 
atonement  for  sin,  as  an  expiation,  or  propitiation. 
"  The  sacrifice  of  Christ,"  says  he,  "  was  truly  and 
properly  in  the  highest  degree,  and  far  beyond  any 
other,  piacular  and  expiatory,  to  make  atonement  for, 
or  to  take  away  sin."J  It  was  a  sacrifice  by  which 
God  was  induced  to  forgive  sin,  and  Avithout  which 
forgiveness  would  not  have  been  obtained.  Dr. 
Price's  views  were  similar.  He  says,  "  As  the  sacri- 
fices under  the  law  of  Moses  expiated  guilt,  and  pro- 
cured remission,  so  Christ's  shedding  his  blood  and 
offering  up  his  life  was  the  means  of  remission  and 
favour  to  penitent  sinners."§ 

*  He  speaks  of  it,  also,  as  a  means  of  vindicaling  ilic  honour  of  God's  laws, 
which  liad  been  violated  by  sin.  See  Magce  on  the  Doctrine  of  Alontment, 
Dissert,  No.  xvii. — BenMordccaVs  Apology,  Vol.  \\,p.  G44. 

t  His  views  may  be  seen  at  large  in  his  Sixth  and  Seventh  Letters  In  Ben 
Mordccai's  Apology. 

X  Scripture  Doctrine  of  Atonement  examined,  J  152. — Also  Taylor's  Key  to 
the  Apostolic  Writings,  chap.  viii.  Dr.  Magee  (Dissert,  xvi.)  has  given  a 
partial  and  distorted  accountof  J.  Taylor's  scheme  of  atoiicniont. 

''  Sermons  on  the  Christian  Doctrine,  p.  182. 


tET.  IV.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  197 

Dr.  Priestley  considered  the  death  of  Christ,  as  a 
means  of  procuring  the  salvation  of  sinners,  chiefly 
by  giving  authority  to  his  rehgion,  proving  the  divini- 
ty of  his  character  and  mission,  estabhshing  the  cer- 
tainty of  a  resurrection  and  a  future  state  of  just  re- 
tribution, and  thus  presenting  the  strongest  possible 
motives  to  penitence,  piety,  and  holiness  of  character, 
which  alone  can  secure  the  pardon  and  acceptance  of 
God.  Near  the  close  of  a  full  exposition  of  his  opin- 
ions concerning  the  death  of  Christ,  he  asks,  "  When 
by  this  means  our  Lord  put  the  finishing  hand  to  so 
extensive  a  scheme,  in  which  Avas  done  whatever 
was  practicable  to  recover  fallen  man  to  immortal 
virtue  and  happiness,  is  he  not  with  great  propriety 
styled  our  redeemer,  saviour,  and  mediator?"*  As 
to  the  opinions  of  the  English  Unitarians  of  the  pre- 
sent day,  it  needs  only  be  said,  that  they  accord  with 
some  or  all  of  the  views  above  detailed. 

The  same  may  be  said  of  Unitarians  in  this  coun- 
try. Although  they  do  not  think  alike  in  every  par- 
ticular, yet  they  agree  in  believing  the  death  of 
Christ  to  have  been  essential  in  the  Gospel  scheme, 
and  in  bringing  about  the  conversion  and  salvation  of 
sinners.  It  will  be  enough  to  quote  two  or  three 
writers  of  deservedly  high  authority.  In  alluding 
to  the  prevailing  sentiments  of  Unitarians  in  this 
country.  Dr.  Channing  says,  "  Some  suppose,  that 
the  death  of  Christ  contributes  to  our  pardon,  as  it 


*  Theological  Repository,  3d  edit.  Vol.  i.  p.  426.  For  a  detection  and  ex- 
posure of  Dr.  Magee's  misrepresentations  of  Di'.  Priestley,  see  Carpenter's 
Examination  of  Charges.  <.tc.  Chap.  vi. 


198  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  m, 

was  a  principal  means  of  confirming  bis  religion,  and 
of  giving  it  a  power  over  the  mind ;  in  other  words, 
that  it  procures  forgiveness  hj  leading  to  that  re- 
pentance and  virtue,  Avhich  is  the  great  and  only  con- 
dition on  which  forgiveness  is  bestowed.  Many  of 
us  are  dissatisfied  with  this  explanation,  and  think 
that  the  Scriptures  ascribe  the  remission  of  sins  to 
Christ's  death  with  an  emphasis  so  peculiar,  that 
we  ought  to  consider  this  event  as  having  a  special 
influence  in  removing  punishment,  as  a  condition  or 
method  of  pardon,  without  which  repentance  would 
not  avail  us,  at  least  to  the  extent,  which  is  now  pro- 
mised by  the  Gospel."*  After  enumerating  various 
particulars  by  which  redemption  from  sin  is  procur- 
ed through  .Tesus  Christ,  Dr.  Ware  concludes,  "  He 
Avas  our  redeemer  by  doing  and  suffering  all,  that 
was  necessary  to  affect  our  deliverance  from  the 
poAver  of  sin,  to  bring  us  to  repentance  and  holiness, 
and  thus  make  us  the  fit  objects  of  forgiveness  and 
the  favour  of  heaven.''t 

According  to  the  faith  of  the  Evangelical  Luthe- 
ran Churches  composing  the  Synod  of  New  York, 
"  Christ  died  on  the  cross,  that  we  might  have  a  sure 
pledge,  that  God  is  willing  to  pardon  our  sins,  with- 
out requiring  any  further  sacrifices,  since  Jesus  has 
sacrificed  himself;  and  finally,  that  he  might  rise 
again,  and  thus  confirm   our  hope   in  a  future  and 

*  Ortlination  Sermon  at  Baltimore,  p.  33. 

I  Letters  to  Trinitarians  and  Calvinists,  p.  92. 


LET.  IV.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  199 

eternal  life."*  These  quotations  together,  I  believe, 
give  an  accurate  representation  of  the  opinions  of 
Unitarians  in  this  country. 

From  the  preceding  view,  three  general  opinions 
concerning  the  effects  of  Christ's  death  seem  to  pre- 
vail among  Unitarians.  First,  that  it  Avas  a  sacrifice 
designed  to  expiate,  or  take  away  the  guilt  of  sin,  by 
its  influence  in  procuring  the  pardon  of  God,  which 
would  not  have  been  granted  without  such  a  sacrifice. 
Secondly,  that  for  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Christ 
he  has  been  rewarded  by  the  Father,  in  an  exalted 
state,  with  supreme  power  to  forgive  sins,  to  make 
ctrectual  intercessions  for  transgressors,  and  bestow 
salvation  on  all  such  as  are  truly  penitent  and  worthy. 
Thirdly,  that  his  death  was  chiefly  instrumental  in 
leading  men  to  embrace  his  religion,  obey  his  com- 
mands, repent  of  their  wickedness,  forsake  their  sins, 
and  attain  that  perfect  holiness  of  character,  which 
God  is  always  ready  to  accept  and  reward  with  par- 
don, and  without  which  no  man  can  be  fitted  for  his 
future  kingdom. 

It  will  be  observed,  that  in  the  view  here  taken, 
no  attempt  has  been  made  either  to  prove  or  defend 
any  particular  doctrine.  I  have  aimed  at  nothing 
more  than  simply  to  state  the  sentiments  of  Unita- 


*  Catechism  for  the  Use  of  the  Churches  belonging  to  the  Evangelical  Lu- 
theran Synod  of  the  State  of  New  York,  drawn  up  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Quitman, 
p.  39.  I  take  it  for  granted,  that  these  churches  are  Unitarian,  as  no  allusions 
to  a  trinity  are  to  be  found,  either  in  their  Catechism,  Liturgy,  or  the  Prayers 
they  recommend.  Whether  these  books  are  approved,  and  used  by  the  Evan- 
gelical Lutheran  Churches  in  other  parts  of  the  United  States  I  am  not  able 
fo  say. 


200  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

rians,  as  they  have  been  expressed  by  different  au- 
thors, and  held  by  different  classes  of  christians. 


LETTER  V. 

Trinitarian   Views  of  Atonement. 


I  co.ME  now  to  examine  the  orthodox  opinions  of 
atonement.  This  task,  however,  can  only  be  exe- 
cuted in  a  general  manner,  and  to  a  certain  extent ; 
for  the  views  of  many  writers  on  this  side  of  the 
question  are  so  obscure  and  unsettled,  that  you  may 
read  treatises  on  atonement  without  being  able  to 
tell,  with  any  degree  of  precision,  what  the  authors 
would  have  you  understand  by  the  word.  This 
arises,  no  doubt,  in  some  measure  from  the  abstract 
nature  of  the  subject,  as  well  as  from  the  indefinite 
notions,  which  these  writers  themselves  entertain  of 
this  branch  of  their  faith.  Every  man,  who  claims  the 
title  of  orthodox,  professes  a  behef  in  what  he  calls 
the  atonement.  For  the  most  part,  also,  these  pro- 
fessed believers  join  in  the  cry  of  heresy  and  censure 
against  those,  Avho  do  not  acknowledge  the  same  form 
of  faith. 

From  this  unanimity  of  profession  and  censure,  it 


tET.  v.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  201 

would  be  reasonable  to  expect  a  unanimity  of  senti- 
ment in  regard  to  the  doctrine,  a  disbelief  of  which 
is  represented  as  the  offending  cause.  In  such  an 
expectation  every  one  will  be  disappointed.  Not 
only  individuals  differ,  but  sects  and  parties  have 
grown  up  with  contending  and  almost  opposite  opin- 
ions, which  have  been  incorporated  into  creeds  and 
systems  of  faith,  and  denominated  respectively  the 
doctrine  of  atonement.  Some  of  these  will  now  be 
examined  ;  but  I  have  room  only  for  a  few  of  the 
more  prominent. 

The  calvinistic  notion  of  atonement  teaches,  that 
the  anger  of  God  was  so  intense  against  his  offending 
creatures,  that  he  would  not  pardon  their  sins,  nor 
receive  them  into  favour,  till  his  only  Son,  a  being 
equal  to  himself,  had  suffered  agony  and  death  in 
this  world,  and  the  torments  of  wicked  spirits  in  hell, 
to  appease  his  wrath,  and  satisfy  his  justice.  The 
calvinistic  standard  of  faith  tells  us,  that  the  Lord 
Jesus,  by  his  perfect  obedience,  "  hath  fulbj  sat'sfied 
the  justice  of  his  Father;"  that  God  justifies  sinners 
"  by  imputing  the  obedience  and  satisfaction  of  Christ 
unto  them ;"  that  Christ,  "  by  his  obedience  and 
death,  6\A  fully  discharge  the  debt  of  those  that  are 
thus  justified,  and  did  make  a  proper,  real,  and  full 
satisfaction  of  his  Father'' s  justice  in  their  behalf." 
We  must  observe,  however,  that  this  applies  only  to 
the  "  elect,  whom  God  did  from  all  eternity  decree  to 
justify."  For  the  remainder,  who  were  doomed  to 
26 


202  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  iii. 

perdition,  no  sacrifice   was  sufficient.     Against  them 
the  anger  of  God  must  always  burn.* 

Such  is  the  account  of  the  atonement  contained  in 
a  noted  calvinistic  formulary.  Its  great  purpose  is  to 
quell  the  anger  and  satisfy  the  justice  of  God.  Calvin 
adds  something  more,  and  makes  its  entire  effect  de- 
pend on  the  manner  in  which  it  was  accomplished. 
He  regards  it  essential  to  the  efficacy  of  Christ's 
death,  that  he  should  be  arraigned  and  condemned 
as  a  malefactor  before  a  tribunal  of  justice.  "  Had  he 
been  assassinated  by  robbers,"  says  Calvin,  "  or  mur- 
dered in  a  popular  tumult ;  in  such  a  death  there 
would  have  been  no  appearance  of  satisfaction.  But 
when  he  is  placed  as  a  criminal  before  the  tribunal, 
Avhen  he  is  accused  and  overpowered  by  the  testi- 
mony of  witnesses,  and  by  the  mouth  of  the  judge  is 
condemned  to  die  ;  we  understand  from  these  cir- 
cumstances, that  he  sustained  the  character  of  a 
malefactor."t  Why  it  was,  that  the  sufferings  of 
death,  undergone  in  conformity  with  the  sentence  of 

*  Confession  of  Faith,  Chap.  viii.  J  5  ;  xi.  i  1,  3,  4. 

Calvin  remarks,  in  speaking  of  the  death  of  Christ,  that  "  the  relation  of 
those  sufferings,  which  were  visible  to  men,  is  very  properly  followed  by  that 
invisible  and  incomprehensible  vengeance,  which  he  suffered  from  the  hand  of 
God  ;  in  order  to  assure  us,  that  not  only  the  body  of  Christ  was  given  as  the 
price  of  our  redemption,  but  that  there  was  another  greater  and  more  excellent 
ransom,  since  he  suffered  in  his  soul  the  dreadful  torments  of  a  person  con- 
demned and  irretrievably  lost."     Instilitfes,  Book  II.  chap.  xvi.  0  10. 

And  again,  "By  contending  with  the  power  of  the  devil,  with  the  dread  of 
death,  and  with  the  pains  of  hell,  he  obtained  the  victory,  and  triumphed 
over  them,  that  in  death  we  may  no  longer  dread  those  things,  which  ouv 
prince  hath  destroyed."    Ibid.  J  11. 

t  Institutes,  Book  ii.  Chap.  16,  4  5. 


rj5T.  v.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  203 

a  wicked  judge,  had  more  merit  in  the  eyes  of  the 
Deity,  than  a  violent  death  brought  about  in  any 
other  way,  Calvin  darkly  explains.  That  he  should 
put  so  much  stress  on  the  manner  of  this  death  is  also 
a  little  remarkable,  since  he  affirms  the  bodily  suf- 
ferings of  Christ  to  have  been  of  no  avail.  "  If 
Christ  had  merely  died  a  corporeal  death,"  he  ob- 
serves, "  no  end  would  have  been  accomplished  by 
it.  It  was  requisite,  also,  that  he  should  feel  the  se- 
verity of  the  divine  vengeance,  in  order  to  appease 
the  wrath  of  God,  and  satisfy  his  justice.  Hence  it 
was  necessary  for  him  to  contend  with  the  powers 
of  hell,  and  eternal  death."*  In  another  place  Cal- 
vin speaks  of  the  death  of  Christ  as  a  punishment  for 
the  sins  of  men,  which  he  endured  in  the  character 
of  a  substitute.! 

This  scheme  of  atonement  has  been  generally  held 
by  the  Universalists.  They  have  enlarged  its  extent, 
by  removing  what  Calvinists  call  the  degree  of  elec- 
tion. To  the  notion,  that  God,  before  he  created  the 
worlds,  consigned  a  certain  portion  of  mankind  to 
endless  ruin  and  torment,  they  do  not  assent.     The 


*Ibid.  B.  iz.C.lG.  *  10. 
t  Book  ii.  C.  12,  }  3. 

Luther  expresses  this  notion  of  punishment  and  substitution  in  stronger  lan- 
guage. '«  And  this,  no  doubt,"  says  Luther,  »  all  the  prophets  did  loresee  iu 
spirit,  that  Christ  should  become  the  greatest  transgr,  ssor,  murderer,  thief, 
rebel,  and  blasphemer,  that  ever  was  or  could  be  in  all  the  world.  For  he  being 
made  a  sacrifice  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world,  is  not  now  an  innocent  per- 
son and  without  sins ;  is  not  now  the  Son  of  God  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  but 
A  SINNER."     Comment  on  Gal.  iii.  13. 

For  various  examples  of  remarkable  language  on  this  subject  from  Luther, 
Calvin,  Flavel,  Ambrose,  Baxter,  Beveridge,  Stockell,  and  others,  see  Wrighfl 
Anti-Satisfactionist,  Chap.  i. 


204  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  in. 

sacrifice  of  Christ  they  believe  a  perfect  satisfaction 
to  divine  justice,  and  an  entire  remedy  for  the  disor- 
ders of  sin  ;  and  thus,  after  the  anger  of  God  is  whol- 
ly appeased,  his  justice  wholly  satisfied,  and  the  evils 
of  sin  removed,  they  hold  it  to  be  a  necessary  opera- 
tion of  the  goodness  and  mercy  of  God  to  pardon, 
accept,  and  save  all  men.  An  infinite  satisfaction^  an 
Almighty  Surety,  must,  as  they  conceive,  take  away 
all  the  impurities  of  our  mortal,  frail,  and  erring  na- 
ture. Hence,  on  the  calvinistic  principle  of  atone- 
ment, they  believe  in  universal  salvation.  And  who- 
ever adheres  to  this  doctrine  in  its  calvinistic  sense, 
and  gives  up  election,  as  I  believe  is  the  case  vvith  a 
very  large  portion  of  the  persons  calling  themselves 
Calvinists,  must,  if  he  will  maintain  consistency,  be  a 
Universalist.* 

Another  sect  of  christians,  who  are  Calvinists  in 
faith,  taking  the  atonement  in  its  proper  latitude,  find 
no  room  for  the  works  of  the  law,  or  any  pious  exer- 
tion on  the  part  of  the  elect.  Their  reasoning  is 
plausible,  and,  on  the  principles  of  Calvmists,  it  is  no 
wonder  they  should  deem  it  irresistible.  As  the 
sacrifice  of  Christ  was  infinite  in  its  nature,  he  being 
the  only  true  God,  so  its  eifects  must  be  itifinite  in 
taking  away  the   sins  of  the  elect,  for  whom  alone 


*  It  will  be  perceived,  that  I  allude  here  to  such  Universalists,  as  have  been 
inclined  to  calvinistic  views.  This  class  formerly  made  a  large  majority  of 
the  sect.  Many  have  sprung  up  of  late  with  a  faith  essentially  difterent,  who 
look  for  salvation  through  Christ,  rather  from  the  pardoning  mercy  and  free 
grace  of  God,  tlian  from  any  satisfaction  to  his  justice,  or  substituted  sufferings 
for  thpir  sins.     The  number  of  this  class  is  probably  increasing. 


T.ET.  V.J  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  203 

the  sacrifice  was  designed.  The  consequences  are, 
that  "  Chiisi's  righteousness  is  so  irajuted  to  the 
elect,  that  they,  ceasing  to  be  sinners,  are  as  right- 
eous as  he  was;"  that  "  repentance  and  confession  of 
sin  are  not  necessary  to  forgiveness  ;"  and  that  the 
"  elect  cannot  do  any  thing,  which  is  displeasing  to 
God,  or  prohibited  by  the  law."  Such  are  the  opin- 
ions of  that  portion  of  Calvinists,  who,  to  preserve 
consistency  in  their  doctrines,  think  it  important  to 
pursue  them  to  their  natural  limits.* 

The  Hopkinsian  Calvinists  and  some  others,  per- 
haps, who  would  not  be  willing  to  have  any  part  in 
the  first  of  these  names,  do  not  admit  the  atonement 
in  the  light  of  a  satisfaction  to  the  justice  of  God, 
and  punishment  for  the  sins  of  men.  Nor  do  they 
believe  any  guilt  is  imputed  to  men,  for  which  they 
deserve  punishment,  except  such  as  they  have  been 
instrumental  in  contracting  ;  nor  any  righteousness 
simply  on  account  of  Christ's  sufferings.  With  them 
the  saving  power  of  the  atonement  was  not  confined 
to  the  elect  ;  it  was  sufficient  to  take  away  the  sins 
of  the  whole  world  ;  and  yet,  by  a  sovereign  decree 
of  God,  none  but  the  elect  can  be  made  partakers  of 
its  benefits.  The  atonement  itself  they  suppose  to 
be  nothing  more,  than  a  public  manifestation  of  God's 
hatred  for  sin,  and  holy  regard  for  his  own  laws,  with- 
out which  manifestation,  God  could  not,  in  pardoning 

*  See  Mosheim's  account  of  the  followers  of  Agricola,  aivl  ot  thi'  English 
Antinomians.  Church  Hist,  Vol,  iv,  ji.  321. — Also  Hannah  Adams's  Dic- 
tionary, 4th  ed.  p.  25. 


206  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [PARt  lii. 

sinners,  sufficiently  have  shown  his  love  of  holiness, 
and  respect  for  his  government.* 

Another  opinion,  respecting  the  extent  of  the 
atonement,  is,  that,  as  Christ  was  God,  and  made  an 
infinite  satisfaction^  he  not  only  expiated,  or  removed 
the  sins  of  men,  but  took  away  all  moral  and  physi- 
cal evil,  and  restored  man  to  his  primitive  perfection 
and  happiness  before  the  fall.  This  scheme  pursues 
the  doctrine  of  atonement  some  degrees  farther,  than 
either  that  of  the  Antinomians,  or  the  Universalists ; 
it  will,  nevertheless,  be  difficult  to  show  wherein  it 
is  not  consistent.  The  same  arguments  by  which  it 
can  be  proved,  that  the  sufferings  and  death  of  an 
Almighty  Being  will  take  away  any  kind  of  evil,  will 
equally  prove,  that  they  must  take  away  all  evil  of 
every  kind  and  degree.! 

*  Triangle,  First  Series,  No.  viii. 

t  This  plan  of  extending  the  effects  of  the  atonement  has  found  its  ablest 
advocate,  perhaps,  in  the  learned  Dr.  Worthington.  His  views  are  summed 
up  in  the  following  words. 

"  The  redemption  of  mankind  by  Jesus  Christ  is  a  deliverance  from  the  evils 
of  the  fall,  and  a  reinstating  thern  in  the  same  circumstances  and  situation 
they  were  in  before  they  fell. — 

"  My  persuasion  is,  that  our  redemption  by  Christ  will,  when  it  has  its  per- 
fect work,  be  productive  of  all  these  great  and  happy  effects;  that  the  human 
nature  shall,  before  the  end  of  the  gospel  age,  and  the  consummation  of  all 
things,  be  delivered  from  sin,  sorrow,  and  sickness,  and  all  the  other  miseries 
and  evils  of  this  life,  proceeding  from  the  fall  of  our  first  parents,  and  in  the 
end,  from  death  itself;  without  tasting  of  which,  it  shall  be  translated  from  an 
earthly  paradise  which  it  shall  once  more  enjoy,  to  a  heavenly  one,  which  it 
shall  enjoy  for  ever.  And  moreover,  that  all  the  disorders  of  nature  in  gene- 
ral shall  be  rectified,  and  that  there  shall  be  a  redemption  of  the  whole  crea- 
tion to  its  first  state,  as  well  as  of  man,  the  lord  of  it."  Essay  on  Man's  Rc- 
demplioHf  p.  253. 


lET.  v.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  207 

Among  Calvinists  a  difference  of  opinion  prevails, 
or  has  prevailed,  respecting  the  particular  sufferings 
of  Christ,  which  are  to  be  accounted  satisfactory. 
Some  conceive  those  sufferings  only  to  be  efficacious, 
or  to  have  any  bearing  on  our  redemption,  which 
Christ  endured  in  the  space  of  the  three  hours  of 
solar  darkness,  while  he  was  hanging  on  the  cross. 
Witsius  took  up  the  argument  against  this  doctrine 
in  reply  to  a  writer,  whom  he  calls  a  very  learned 
man.  Witsius  declared  it  to  be  the  faith  of  his 
church,  and  of  himself,  that  the  sufferings  of  Christ 
during  the  whole  course  of  his  life,  both  in  soul  and 
body,  constituted  his  satisfaction.* 

The  Arminians  believe  the  effects  of  the  atone- 
ment to  be  universal ;  but  it  removes  no  sin,  except 
as  it  puts  men  mto  a  capacity  to  escape  from  the 
evils  of  sin  by  opening  the  door  of  pardon  to  all. 
who  will  comply  with  the  conditions  of  the  Gospel, 
namely,  faith,  repentance,  and  a  holy  obedience  to 
the  laws  of  Christ.  God  has  not  by  any  decree  of 
election  or  reprobation  excluded  a  single  individual 
from  embracing  these  conditions.  The  terms  of  sal- 
vation are  offered  to  all,  and  every  one  is  free  to  re- 
ceive or  neglect  them.  The  notion,  that  the  suffer- 
ings of  Christ  were  substituted  for  the  punishment 
of  sinners,  and  that  his  righteousness  is  imputed  to 
them,  is  rejected  by  the  Arminians.  Limborch 
speaks  of  Christ  having  reconciled  us  to  God,  and 
having  suffered  the  severest  affliction  on  our  account, 

^  Economy  of  the  Corenants,  p.  a»3 — 327. 


208  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  m. 

and  averted  the  punishment,  which,  as  sinners,  we 
deserve  ;  but,  at  the  same  time,  he  refuses  assent  to 
the  doctrine  of  satisfaction,  as  having  no  proof  in 
scripture.*  Arminius  himself  seems  to  have  consi- 
dered the  death  of  Christ  as  in  some  way  atTecting 
the  justice  of  God,  for  he  says,  that,  althougli  the 
mercy  of  the  Deity  always  inchned  him  to  forgive 
sins,  yet  his  justice  interposed,  till  by  the  exercise  of 
his  mercy  he  gave  Christ  to  suffer  and  die.  In  this 
way  a  reconciliation  was  accomplished,  and  all  men 
may  enjoy  its  benefits,  who  will  accept  the  conditions 
of  pardon.  That  the  faith  of  Arminians  generally 
has  ever  corresponded  in  this  particular  with  the 
opinion  of  their  leader,  is  not  so  clear.  In  regard  to 
the  nature  of  the  atonement,  the  Arminians  and  Hop- 
kinsians  seem  not  to  differ.  As  to  its  benefits,  the 
former  make  them  applicable  to  all  men  ;  while  the 
latter  suppose  them  actually  restricted  to  the  elect, 
although  they  are  sufficient  to  take  away  the  sins  of 
the  whole  world. 

The  articles  of  the  English  Church  are  ambiguous 
in  what  relates  to  atonement,  as  appears  from  their 
beino-  received  and  defended  with  equal  pertinacity 
by  persons  entertaining  every  variety  of  opinion. 
These  articles  declare,  that  "  We  are  accounted 
righteous  before  God,  only  for  the  merit  of  our  Lord 
and  Saviour,  Jesus  Christ,  by  faith,  and  not  for  our 
own  works  and  deservings."t     Were    these    words 

*  Thcolog.  Christ.  I/ib.  iii,  C;ip.  21,  !>  6 ;  et  Cap.  22,  H- 
t  Article  XI,  on  the  Justification  of  Man. 


?,ET.  v.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  209 

taken  in  their  literal  sense,  without  comment,  few 
persons,  probably,  would  suspect,  that  they  express 
any  other  than  the  calvinistlc  views  of  atonement; 
but  many  able  and  learned  expositors  of  the  articles 
assure  us,  that  no  such  meaning  can  be  deduced  from 
them.  In  short,  Arminians  read  them  one  way,  and 
Calvinists  another. 

In  the  prayer  of  consecration,  in  the  Communion 
Service,  it  is  said,  that  Christ  was  "  given  to  suffer 
death  upon  the  cross  for  our  redemption,  and  made 
there,  by  his  own  oblation  of  himself  once  offered,  a 
full,  perfect,  and  sufficient  sacrifice,  oblation,  and  sa- 
tisfaction, for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world."  This 
passage  is  calvinistic  in  clearly  admitting  the  doctrine 
of  satisfaction.  It  is  equally  to  the  purpose  of  Ar- 
minians, Universalists,  and  Hopkinsians,  by  allowing 
the  death  of  Christ  to  be  a  sufficient  atonement  for 
the  sins  of  the  whole  world.  The  Hopkinsians  may 
say,  that  this  article  admits  the  provision  to  be  ample, 
and  does  not  oppose  their  notion  of  the  elect  only 
being  suffered  to  enjoy  it ;  the  Universalists  may  ap- 
ply it  in  its  fullest  latitude,  as  signifying,  that  all  men 
must  be  saved  by  an  atonement,  which  is  sufficient 
for  all ;  and  the  Arminians  may  restrict  its  applica- 
tion to  such  as  choose  to  partake  of  the  benefits  thus 
procured,  by  accepting  the  terms  of  the  Gospel. 
Hence,  to  whatever  sect  a  man  may  belong,  he  can 
find  in  the  articles  and  formularies  of  this  church  a 
happy  accommodation  to  his  opinions.  This  is  a 
thing  of  no  consequence,  however,  at  present,  any 
27 


2  JO  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  in. 

farther,  than  It  indicates  the  great  variety  of  opinions 
in  the  Church  of  England  on  atonement.* 

No  authority  is  referred  to  by  the  orthodox, 
whenever  atonement  is  brought  into  discussion,  more 
frequently,  or  with  more  confidence,  than  Bishop  Ma- 
gee.  All  parties  look  up  to  him,  as  the  champion  of 
their  cause.  But,  whoever  will  read  the  Bishop's 
book,  and  compare  his  account  of  this  doctrine  with 
the  views  usually  exhibited  by  any  sect  calling  itself 
orthodox,  will  discover  no  more  than  a  very  general 
resemblance  between  them.  He  says,  "The  sacri- 
fice of  Christ  was  never  deemed  by  any,  who  did  not 
wish  to  calumniate  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement,  to 
have  made  God  placable,  but  merely  viewed  as  a 
means  appointed  by  divine  wisdom,  by  which  to  be- 
stow forgiveness."t  This  is  the  basis  of  his  plan, 
and  you  have  only  to  recur  to  some  of  the  pages  of 
my  last  letter  to  be  convinced,  that  it  differs  in  no 
essential  feature  from  the  views  of  many  Unitarians. 
Nay,  I  have  never  heard  of  an  individual  Unitarian, 
who  did  not  maintain  what  the  Bishop  says  again, 
that  the  death  of  Christ  "  was  the  7neans,  whereby 
God  has  thought  fit  to  grant  his  favour  and  gracious 
aid  to  repentant  sinners,  and  to  fulfil  that  merciful  in- 
tention, which  he  had  at  all  times  entertained  to- 
wards his  fallen  creatures."  No  language  could  bet- 
ter express  the  general  faith  of  Unitarians. 

They  differ,  as  we  have  seen,  in  regard  to  the  man- 


*  See  Bishop  Tomliiie's  Refutation  of  Calvinism,  Clin  p.  iv. 
f  First  Discourse  on  the  Atonement,  p.  28. 


LET.  V.J  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  211 

ner  in  Avhich  these  means  operate  ;  and  the  Bishop, 
so  far  from  explaining  this  point,  confesses  his  igno- 
rance, and  tells  us  plainly,  that  "  he  does  not  know, 
nor  does  it  concern  him  to  know."  He  talks  of  sac- 
rifice, atonement,  propitiation,  expiation,  but  he  no- 
where explains  what  he  means  by  them;  and,  as  for 
a  vicarious  punishment,  a  satisfaction  to  divine  justice, 
an  appeasing  of  the  wrath  of  God,  the  sufferings  of 
a  substitute, and  imputed  righteousness  and  sm,  he  de- 
nies the  whole.  He  calls  that  "  an  idle  charge,  made 
against  the  doctrine  of  atonement,  of  supposing  a 
real  substitution  in  the  room  of  the  offender,  and  a 
literal  translation  of  his  guilt  and  punishment  to  the 
immolated  victim  ;  a  thing  utterly  incomprehensible, 
as  neither  guilt  nor  'punishment  can  be  conceived,  but 
with  reference  to  consciousness,  which  cannot  be 
transferred."*  The  Bishop  here  furnishes  one  of 
the  strongest  arguments  against  the  popular  doctrine 
of  atonement.  Whoever,  indeed,  will  examine  his 
two  Discourses,  with  the  purpose  of  drawing  out  the 
entire  force  of  his  meaning  from  the  mist  of  ambigu- 
ous words  which  hangs  around  it,  will  be  surprised, 
that  he  should  give  vent  to  so  many  bitter  feelings, 
and  expend  so  immense  a  stock  of  labour,  in  batter- 
ing down  a  heresy  of  Unitarianism,  which  stands  on 
the  same  ground,  and  presents  nearly  the  same  as- 
pect, as  the  edifice  of  his  own  faith.t 

*  Dissertations,  No.  xxxviii. 

+  Dr.  Magee  does  not  allow,  that  the  satisfaction  of  Christ  was  necessary  in 
the  nature  of  things.  "  That  men  could  not  have  been  forgiven,"  he  says, 
"  unless  Christ  had  suffered  to  purchase  their  forgiveness,  is  no  part  of  the  doc- 


212  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  ni. 

I  have  thus  brought  forward  in  this,  and  in  the 
preceding  letter,  such  of  the  opinions  prevaihng 
among  Cliristians,  on  the  subject  under  discussion,  as 
my  limits  would  permit,  and  as  my  object  requires. 
Thev  are  placed,  it  is  hoped,  in  a  clear  and  intelligible 
light.  It  will  be  observed,  that  the  word  atonement  has 
every  where  been  used  in  its  broad  and  true  sense, 
denoting  a  reconciliation  between  God  and  man,  pro- 
duced in  some  way  by  the  life,  sufferings,  and  death 
of  Jesus  Christ.  In  this  general  sense,  it  applies  to  all 
the  opinions  which  have  been  mentioned,  for  they  all 
point  to  this  end.  It  has  lately  been  made  techni- 
cal and  arbitrary,  and  forced  into  a  different  service 
by  every  individual,  inasmuch  as  CYcry  one  employs 
it  to  express  his  own  peculiar  sentiments. 

All  profess  to  believe  in  the  atonement,  but  when 
you  look  at  the  respective  combination  of  images  and 
impressions,  to  which  each  affixes  the  term,  they  pre- 

tiineof  the  atonement,  as  held  by  the  Church  of  England."  Dissert.  ^Yo.  xvii. 
Respecting  the  Chuich  of  England,  it  has  already  been  shown,  that  its  mem- 
bers take  an  unlimited  latitude  in  the  terms  of  their  faith  ;  and  all  profess  to, 
he  guided  by  the  strict  letter  of  the  Church.  Dr.  Magee,  therefore,  has  no  au- 
thority to  lay  down  a  general  proposition  of  this  nature,  as  applicable  to  the 
Church  at  large. 

It  is  moreover,  certain,  that  this  position  is  not  true,  as  it  relates  to  the  po- 
pular doctrine  of  atonement  by  satisfaction.  The  advocates  for  this  doctrine 
universally  argue,  that  it  arises  from  a  necessity  in  the  very  nature  or  attri- 
butes of  God.  Witsius,  in  discussing  this  point  against  the  Arminians,  in  his 
chapter  on  the  JVecessity  of  Christ''s  Satisfaction,  although  he  waves  any  con- 
sideration of  the  absolute  power  of  God,  maintains,  that  his  justice,  wisdom, 
and  holiness,  impose  upon  him  the  necessity  of  requiring  such  a  satisfaction,  as 
that  supposed  to  be  rendered  by  Christ.  In  his  language,  the  reason  why  God 
rhose  to  save  "  elect  sinners,  by  the  satisfaction  of  his  Son,  was  because,  in 
his  wisdom,  he  saw  no  other  nay,  by  which  satisfaction  could  be  made  to  his 
holiness  and  justice."     Economy  of  the  Covcn(iri!s,j).  349. 


LET,  v.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  213 

sent  themselves  in  every  imaginable  variety  of  form 
and  dimensions.  A  Calvinist,  in  using  the  word,  thinks 
of  one  thing,  an  Arrainian  of  another,  a  Hopkinsian 
of  another,  and  so  round  the  whole  circle.  We 
hence  perceive  the  necessity  of  penetrating  deeper 
than  the  sound  of  the  word,  before  we  can  form  any 
accurate  judgment  of  the  opinions  of  those  by  whom 
it  is  used.  For  this  reason,  I  have  thought  proper 
not  to  inquire  into  the  meaning  of  the  word  in  all  its 
arbitrary  senses,  as  it  has  come  under  notice,  but  to 
let  this  appear  from  the  ideas,  or  things,  which  it  was 
shown  to  represent.* 

That  the  opinions  above  enumerated,  as  being 
held  by  persons  calling  themselves  orthodox,  may  be 
presented  in  a  narrower  compass,  they  are  heie  ex- 
hibited in  a  brief  recapitulation. 

Concerning  the  nature  of  atonement,  it  is  repre- 
sented, First,  that  Christ,  by  his  sufferings  and  death, 
appeased  the  wrath,  and  satisfied  the  justice  of  God, 
and  with  the  price  of  his  blood  reconciled  the  Deity 
to  his  offending  creatures,  by  paying  the  immense 
debt  in  which  their  guilt  had  involved  them.  Second- 
ly, the  death  of  Christ  was  a  punishment,  which  he 
endured  by  literally  taking  on  himself  the  sins  of 
the  whole  world,  and  suffering  as  a  substitute  for  sin- 
ners, or  in  their  place,  the  full  amount  of  pain,  which 

*  The  word,  to  alone,  in  its  primitive  sense,  signifies  to  produce  an  agreement, 
or  reconciliation  between  parties.  Atonement  denotes  this  agreement,  or  re- 
conciliation. It  is  once  only  found  in  the  New  Testament,  Rom.  v.  II,  where 
it  is  a  translation  of  the  word  KUTctXKtfyn,  whose  literal  meaning  is  reconci'ia- 
tion.  This  Greek  word  is  found  four  times  in  the  New  Testament,  and  in  every 
other  instance  is  rendered  reconciliation.     Rom,  xi.  15  ;  2  Cor.  v.  18,  19. 


214  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  Ivarv  hi. 

their  sins  deserve.  Thirdly,  the  atonement  consists 
in  the  public  exhibition  of  God's  hatred  of  sin,  love 
of  holiness,  and  respect  for  his  government,  which 
was  made  in  the  death  of  Christ.  Fourthly,  it  was 
a  means,  which  God  chose  to  emjjloy  in  bringing  sin- 
ners into  such  a  state  of  freedom  from  guilt  as  would 
permit  him,  consistently  with  his  justice  and  holiness, 
to  extend  to  them  pardon,  and  the  blessings  of  salva- 
tion. 

Again,  as  to  the  extent,  or  effects,  of  atonement, 
we  are  told,  First,  that  the  sufferings  of  Christ  were 
sufficient  only  for  an  elect  number.  Secondly,  they 
were  competent  to  take  away  the  sins  of  the  world, 
but  by  a  decree  of  God  the  elect  only  can  be  par- 
takers of  their  benefits.  Tliirdly,  they  are  nt)t  only 
sufficient  for  all,  but  on  certain  conditions,  with  which 
every  one  can  comply,  they  may  be  made  eftectual 
to  all.  Fourthly,  they  were  expressly  designed  to  be 
extended  to  the  whole  human  race,  to  deliver  all  men 
from  the  evil  of  sin,  and  procure  a  universal  salva- 
tion. Fifthly,  the  authority  of  the  law  is  so  com- 
pletely annulled  by  the  death  of  Christ,  that  repen- 
tance is  not  necessary  for  the  elect,  nor  can  they  do 
any  thing  displeasing  to  God.  Sixthly,  the  death  of 
Christ  removes  all  physical,  as  well  as  moral  evil,  and 
restores  man  to  the  condition  of  holiness  and  felicity, 
which  he  enjoyed  before  the  fall. 

And  again,  as  to  the  manner  in  which  the  objects 
of  atonement  are  attained,  it  is  said.  First,  that  those 
sufferings  only  were  efficacious,  which  Christ  under- 
went during  the  three  hours  of  darkness,  while  he 


1-ET.  v.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  215 

hung  on  the  cross.  Secondly^  all  his  sufferings  in  the 
flesh  are  taken  into  the  account.  Thirdly,  it  was  ne- 
cessary for  him  to  endure  for  a  time  the  torments  of 
wicked  spirits  in  hell.  Fourthly^  his  death  would 
have  availed  nothing,  unless  he  had  been  condemned 
as  a  criminal  in  a  court  of  justice. 

From  the  above  analysis,  it  is  not  to  be  inferred, 
that  all  these  distinctions  are  incompatible  with  each 
other.  Some  are  contradictory,  some  are  divided  by 
broad  lines,  while  others  assimilate  so  closely,  as  to 
allow  the  same  person  to  bring  them  both  within  the 
enclosure  of  his  creed.  The  slightest  inspection  will 
show,  that  the  differences,  on  the  whole,  are  ex- 
tremely great,  much  greater  than  with  Unitarians. 
And  amongst  all  these,  where  shall  we  find  that  true 
faith,  that  singleness  of  belief  which  is  essential  to 
salvation  ?  Which  of  these  schemes  is  the  one  en- 
titled to  the  dignity  of  being  a  component  part  in  the 
essence  of  Christianity  ?  Till  this  be  fairly  settled, 
and  sanctioned  by  all  the  orthodox,  why  is  any  per- 
son to  be  condemned  for  not  presuming  to  select  and 
acknowledge  it,  as  a  fundamental  article  ?  Why 
should  he  resign  what  he  believes  to  be  scripture 
truth,  derived  from  a  serious  and  careful  study  of 
the  word  of  God,  for  this  labyrinth  of  uncertainty  ? 
Let  him  rather  rest  his  hopes  on  a  safer  foundation 
by  keeping  to  his  Bible,  and  praying  the  Father  of 
mercies  for  the  aid  of  his  holy  Spirit  to  enlighten 
him  with  a  knowledge  of  truth,  and  strengthen  him  in 
the  practice  of  holiness. 


216  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [^art  hi. 

All  the  varieties  of  opinion  to  which  our  attention 
has  been  directed,  both  of  Unitarians  and  Trinita- 
rians, as  far  as  they  relate  to  the  specific  effects  of 
the  death  of  Christ,  may  be  arranged  in  two  general 
classes. 

The  first  class  embraces  those  views,  according  to 
W'hich  his  death  is  regarded  as  a  means  by  which 
the  guilt  of  sin  is  removed,  and  God  is  induced  to 
pardon  offenders,  and  bestow  upon  them  the  gift  of 
eternal  life.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  extent 
of  the  influence  of  Christ's  death,  or  however  this 
influence  may  in  the  Avisdom  of  God  have  been  ap- 
plied, it  is  supposed  to  have  operated  only  in  calling 
into  exercise  the  mercy  and  love  of  God,  or  rather 
in  putting  sinners  into  such  a  condition,  that  God  may 
grant  them  his  pardoning  mercy  and  acceptance, 
without  any  violation  of  his  justice  and  holiness. 
Within  this  class  may  be  ranked  all  Unitarians,  and 
a  large  portion  of  Trinitarians,  both  of  whom  go  up- 
on essentially  the  same  principles,  and  are  aiming  at 
the  same  object,  although  they  may  be  conducted  in 
different  directions. 

The  second  class  embraces  those  persons,  who  look 
for  the  efiicacy  of  Christ's  death  in  the  satisfaction 
it  has  made  to  divine  justice,  in  its  power  to  appease 
the  wrath  of  God,  and  in  its  value  as  a  sacrifice  to 
the  Deity,  without  Avhich  he  could  not  pardon  or 
save  his  creatures  ;  and  those,  also,  Avho  believe 
Christ  to  have  suffered  by  way  of  punishment,  as  a 
substitute  for  the  elect,  and  to  have  purchased  for 
them  the  forgiveness  of  sin  and  a  title  to  salvation  by 


RET.  v.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  217 

becoming  their  surety,  releasing  them  from  tlie  ob- 
ligations of  the  law,  and  discharging  their  debt  of 
obedience.  This  scheme  is  called  the  doctririe  of 
satisfaction,  and  sometimes  the  popular  doctrine  of 
atonement.  It  is  chiefly,  if  not  entirely,  confined  to 
Calvinists.  It  is  universally  rejected  by  Unitarians, 
as  being,  in  their  opinion,  opposed  to  the  Scriptures, 
irrational  in  itself,  derogatory  to  the  character  of 
God,  and  pernicious  in  its  influence. 

To  this  doctrine  my  future  remarks  will  be  con- 
fined, with  particular  reference  to  its  reasonableness 
and  moral  tendency. 


LETTER  VI. 


On  the  popular  Doctrine  of  Atonement^  as  affecting  the 
Character  of  God. 

SIR, 

In  my  two  last  letters,  I  have  endeavoured  to 
bring  together  some  of  the  opinions,  which  christians 
of  various  denominations  have  entertained,  concern- 
ing atonement  by  the  death  of  Christ.  I  have  at- 
tempted to  simplify  the  subject,  and  compress  its 
numerous  branches  within  as  small  a  space  as  possi- 
ble. This  is  not  the  only  topic  in  religion,  it  is  ac- 
knowledged, about  which  much  time  has  been  idly 
expended,  unmeaning  words  profusely  multiplied,  and 
28 


218  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [i'ART  in. 

elaborate  works  composed,  without  communicating 
light  or  profit  to  the  reader  ;  yet  the  facts  collected 
in  my  two  last  letters  abundantly  prove,  that  no  spe- 
culations or  discussions  have  been  less  fruitful  of  truth 
and  sound  knowledge,  than  those  relating  to  atone- 
ment. 

We  arrived  at  the  conclusion,  however,  that  not- 
withstanding many  important  minor  differences,  all 
the  opinions,  which  have  come  to  ligiit,  may  be  clas- 
sed in  two  general  divisions.  The  first  division  com- 
prises those  persons,  who  refer  pardon  and  divine  m 
acceptance  exclusively  to  the  free  mercy  and  love  of 
God,  and  look  upon  the  death  of  Christ  as  a  means, 
by  which  God  is  induced  to  forgive  past  transgres- 
sions, and  sinners  are  qualified,  by  accepting  certain 
conditions,  for  enjoying  the  blessed  gifts  of  salvation. 
The  second  division  takes  in  all  those,  who  regard 
the  death  of  Christ  as  a  bloody  sacrifice  to  satisfy 
the  justice,  and  appease  the  wrath  of  God,  and  thus 
to  purchase  for  transgressors  the  divine  forgiveness, 
and  eternal  life. 

To  this  latter  scheme  our  attention  will  now  be 
turned  ;  and  that  we  may  have  its  several  parts  dis- 
tinctly before  us,  it  will  not  be  amiss  to  commence 
with  the  following  delineation  of  its  features. 

It  gives  us  to  understand,  that  God  created  man 
innocent,  but  left  him  exposed  to  evil,  with  the 
power  of  choosing  or  avoiding  it  ;  man  sinned,  and 
thus  committed  such  an  ofience  against  the  justice  of 
Ood,  as  no  effort  of  his  own  could  either  eradicate 
or  diminish ;  God  was  wrathful  and   implacable   to 


J.ET,  vi.J  TRmiTY  AND  ATONEMENT.  219 

such  a  degree,  that  he  could  not  be  appeased,  nor 
allow  his  mercy  to  extend  to  his  creatures,  till  his 
justice  was  fully  satisfied  by  the  sufferings  and  pu- 
nishment of  an  innocent  being.  That  all  men  might 
not  perish  forever,  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  who  was 
also  God,  voluntarily  offered  to  endure  the  full 
amount  of  suffering  required  to  quell  the  anger  of 
the  Father,  and  reconcile  him  to  his  creatures  ;  this 
offer  the  Father  accepted,  and  in  compliance  Avith 
the  contract  thus  made,  the  sins  of  men  were  im- 
puted to  Christ,  or  he  took  them  upon  him  in  such 
a  way,  that  their  guilt  became  his  own  ;  in  this  con- 
dition, he  suffered  as  guilty  of  the  sins  of  the  Avhole 
world,  although  it  was  impossible  for  him  to  commit  a 
single  sin.  As  Christ  has  performed  his  part  of  the 
contract,  and  paid  the  debt  of  sinners,  he  may  justly 
demand  the  fulfilment  of  the  Father's  promise,  and 
claim  the  blessings  of  salvation  for  all  Avhose  merit- 
ed punishment  he  has  endured. 

Such  are  some  of  the  outlines  of  the  doctrine  com- 
monly called  the  doctrine  of  satisfaction,  or  the  popu- 
lar doctrine  of  atonement.  It  is  no  part  of  my  pre- 
sent undertaking  to  confute  this  tenet,  nor  to  oppose 
the  arguments  by  which  it  is  supported.  In  this  let- 
ter I  shall  attempt  nothing  more,  than  a  few  re- 
marks on  the  principles  which  it  involves,  with  the 
special  purpose  of  ascertaining  in  what  manner  these 
affect  the  character  of  God,  and  how  far  they  have 
a  purifying  and  practical  influence  in  promoting  pie- 
ty, devotion,  and  the  various  duties  to  our  Maker. 
Unless  I  am  greatly  deceived,  the  doctrine  in  these 


220  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  ni. 

important  respects  is  not  only  deficient,  but  fraught 
with  much  positive  evil. 

Let  us  begin  with  the  first  principle  of  the  whole 
system,  which  relates  to  the  nature  of  the  divine  jus- 
tice. It  is  assumed  as  an  established  position,  that 
the  justice  of  God  is  rigid,  unyielding,  and  relentless, 
having  an  absolute  control  over  mercy,  goodness,  and 
every  other  moral  attribute,  and  refusing  the  pardon 
of  any  sin,  till  a  full  measure  of  punishment  has  been 
inflicted.  This  position  is  radically  erroneous.  Jus- 
tice gives  the  right  to  punish,  but  it  does  not  impose 
an  obligation  to  exercise  this  right.  As  God  has  an 
undoubted  right,  it  would  always  be  just  for  him  to 
punish  transgressors  ;  but  it  does  not  hence  follow, 
that  he  is  obliged  to  do  it.  Whenever  God  punishes 
sin,  it  must  be  for  some  end  ;  and  if  this  end  can  be 
answered  in  any  other  way,  his  justice  does  not  re- 
quire punishment.  If  he  chooses,  for  instance,  to 
pardon  sinners  on  certain  conditions,  or  uncondition- 
ally, he  may  do  it  without  any  violation  of  his  justice. 
He  may  certainly  do  as  he  will  with  his  own.  It  is 
perfectly  consistent  with  all  his  attributes,  that  he 
should  propose  such  conditions,  as  in  his  wisdom  and 
goodness  he  may  deem  suflicient  to  promote  the  ends 
of  his   orovernmcnt.     When   the  conditions   on  the 

o 

part  of  the  sinner  arc  complied  with,  the  veracity 
and  the  justice  of  God  are  pledged  to  make  good  his 
promises.* 

*  President  Edwards  says,  that  when  Christ  died,  "o//  teas  ^finished  tha.t 
was  re(iiiircd,  in  order  to  satisfy  the  threatenings  of  ihc  law,  and  all  that  was 
oecesjary,  in  order  to  satisfy  divine  jublice.     Then  the  iilmosl  lliat  viiidictivt 


LET.  VI.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  221 

Justice  Is  of  two  kinds,  and  these  are  confounded 
together  in  the  scheme  of  satisfaction.  In  one  sense, 
justice  gives  the  power,  or  right  of  doing  a  thing ; 
and  in  the  other,  it  requires  a  thing  to  be  done.  If 
a  man  has  injured  you,  it  is  just  that  you  should  ex- 
act reparation  ;  nevertheless,  if  you  are  disposed  to 
forgive  the  injury,  or  to  pass  it  over  without  any  con- 
sideration, justice  does  not  oblige  you  to  make  such  a 
demand.  But  if  you  have  injured  another  person, 
justice  calls  on  you  for  a  full  reparation  ;  you  can 
claim  no  right  or  privilege  by  which  you  can  be  ab- 
solved, unless  you  are  forgiven  by  the  injured  party. 
In  other  words,  justice  obliges  every  man  to  render 
to  another  his  strict  due,  but  does  not  compel  him 
to  claim  all  his  own.  Hence,  God  may  pardon  the 
sins  of  his  creatures  upon  any  terms,  which  he 
thinks  proper,  without  exacting  satisfaction  to  his 
justice.* 

justice  demanded,  even  the  ickole  dtbt  was  paid."  History  of  Redemption, 
p.  198. 

This  writer  makes  the  following  flistliiction  between  the  satisfaction  and 
the  merits  of  Christ.  "  All  is  clone,"  he  observes,  "  by  the  piice  that  Christ 
lays  down.  But  the  price  that  Christ  laid  down  does  two  things.  It  pays 
our  debt,  and  so  "it  satisjies  ;  by  its  intrinsic  value,  and  by  the  agreement  be- 
tween the  Father  and  the  Son,  it  procures  a  title  to  us  for  happiness,  and  so 
it  merits.  The  satisfaction  of  Christ  is  to  free  us  from  misery,  and  the  merit 
of  Christ  is  to  purchase  happiness  for  us."     Ibid.  p.  175. 

This  distinction  reminds  one  of  the  schoolmen.  It  is  evidently  a  distinction 
without  a  difference  ;  for  whoever  is  freed  from  misery,  must  in  the  nature  of 
things  enjoy  happiness.  Hence  satisfaction  and  merit,  as  used  by  President 
Edwards,  do  not  signify  two  things,  but  the  same  thing. 

*  In  remarking  on  these  distinctions,  Emlyn  observes,  that  justice  is  "either 
quodjieri  potest,  what  lawfully  may  be  done  ;  or  quod  fieri  debet,  what  ought 
to  be  done."     Works,  Vol.  it.  p.  49.     Now  as  it  is  lawful  or  right,  for  God  to 


222  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

If  you  deny  this,  you  take  from  God  the  power  to 
forgive  ;  for  what  kind  of  forgiveness  ie  that,  which 
is  granted  after  the  demand  of  the  laAV  is  entirely 
satisfied  ?  Would  you  commend  a  magistrate  for  his 
lenity  and  forgiving  temper,  who  should  refuse  to  re- 
lease his  prisoner,  till  he  had  suffered  in  full  mea- 
sure the  penalty  of  the  law  ?  You  could  not,  it  is 
true,  accuse  such  a  magistrate  of  any  wrong,  because 
he  has  been  no  more  than  strictly  just ;  and  it  is 
equally  certain,  that  you  could  not  talk  of  his  for- 
giveness, for  he  has  forgiven  nothing.  And  on  the 
other  hand,  forgiveness  implies  a  relinquishment  of 
justice.  God  cannot  be  said  to  forgive  a  single  sin, 
the  penalty  of  which  has  been  withheld  by  reason 
of  a  satisfaction  to  his  justice,  or  for  any  other 
cause.* 

We  hence  perceive  on  what  a  slender  support 
this  whole  system  hangs.      Its  very  first  principle   is 

punish  transgressors  of  his  law,  it  is  therefore  just ;  but  this  proves  no  injustice 
in  declining  to  exercise  this  right.  Justice,  in  this  case,  is  what  may  be  done, 
but  not  what,  by  any  necessity,  ought  to  be  done. 

*  To  preserve  consistency  in  one  part,  some  have  been  contented  to  run  into 
extremes  and  absurd  consequences  in  another.  Hence  to  keep  up  the  notion 
of  the  inflexible  nature  of  divine  justice,  which  is  the  root  and  brancli  of  the 
whole  system  of  satisfaction,  they  frankly  and  boldly  confess,  that  God  does 
not  forgive  sin.  Mr.  Stockell,  a  most  zealous  defender  of  the  popular  doctrine, 
says,  "In  a  strict  and  proper  sense,  the  infinite  God  doth  not  forgive  sin,  for 
it  is  readily  granted  by  all,  who  are  sound  in  the  faith,  that  Jesus  Christ  hath 
given  full  satisfaction  to  divine  justice  for  all  sin,  and  hath  fully  paid  the 
debt  of  the  church.  And  if  Christ  has  satisfied  the  justice  of  God  for  all  the 
sins  of  his  people,  how  then  can  it  justly,  or  with  propriety  of  speech  be  said, 
that  God  pardoneth  our  sins  and  transgressions?  Sure  I  am,  that  debt  can 
never  be/or/^inen,  which  is /7oirf."  Redeemer  s  Glory  Unveiled,  p.  157.  See 
«ls»,  lVrighl''s  Anti-batixfnrtionisI,  Chap.  i. 


LET.  VI.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  223 

assumed,  incapable  of  demonstration,  and  opposed  to  1 
the  divine  nature.  It  makes  God  a  severe,  inflexible 
judge,  who  is  obliged  and  disposed  to  exact  entire 
satisfaction  from  his  creatures,  before  he  will  show 
them  mercy.  If  we  were  argumg  the  subject,  we 
might  say  without  hesitation,  that  this  simple  view 
of  the  nature  of  justice  were  sufficient  to  place  this 
doctrine  on  a  ground  perfectly  untenable.  At  pre- 
sent, it  is  enough  to  infer,  that  a  system,  which  is 
held  together  by  a  principle  so  radically  and  obvious- 
ly erroneous,  and  which  takes  from  God  the  power 
of  granting  mercy  and  forgiveness  to  his  creatures  on  ' 
such  terms  as  he  may  choose,  cannot  be  expected  to 
have  any  special  efficacy  in  giving  us  just  conceptions 
of  the  divine  attributes,  or  inspiring  us  with  that  re- 
spect and  reverence,  which  are  due  to  a  perfectly 
holy,  wise,  and  benevolent  God. 

As  to  the  anger^  or  wrath  of  God,  which  Calvinists 
usually  connect  with  their  view  of  the  divine  justice, 
it  seems  unreasonable  to  presume  so  much  on  the 
common  sense  and  good  feelings  of  mankind,  as  to 
inquire  what  is  contained  in  such  a  representation, 
which  can  cause  us  to  love  God,  or  to  magnify  and 
revere  his  moral  perfections.  An  angry  being  of  in- 
finite power,  who  seeks  to  inflict  his  vengeance  on 
the  feeble  creatures  of  his  own  workmanship,  is  most 
certainly  not  a  being,  who  can  be  regarded  with  much 
depth  of  love,  or  warmth  of  piety,  or  purity  of  devo- 
tion, by  the  creatures  themselves,  whom  he  is  ready 
to  destroy  with  the  devouring  flames  of  his  anger. 
And  especially,  if  with  this  doctrine  you  connect  to- 


224  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

tal  depravity,  which  is  an  equally  important  hnk  in 
the  calvinistic  chain,  it  would  seem  absolutely  impos- 
sible, that  any  love,  or  gratitude,  or  any  other  good 
affection  can  find  a  place  in  the  breast  of  man. 

How  can  you  love  a  being,  who  has  all  power  over 
you,  and  who  is  not  only  angry  with  you,  and  refuses 
to  show  any  mercy  till  a  full  satisfaction  be  made  to 
his  justice,  but  who  has  created  you  with  such  a  na- 
ture, as  to  render  it  impossible  for  you  to  avoid  break- 
ing his  laws,  and  incurring  his  displeasure?  Add  still 
further,  that  he  will  not  be  satisfied  by  any  returns 
you  can  make,  or  any  sufferings  you  can  endure.  As 
you  are  not  able  in  your  finite  nature  to  answer  the 
demands  of  his  insatiable  justice,  he  seizes  upon  an 
innocent  victim,  on  whom  he  pours  out  all  the  vials 
of  his  wrath.  He  then  professes  himself  appeased, 
and  hesitates  no  longer  to  open  the  arms  of  his  mer- 
cy. Such  is  the  character,  which  the  doctrine  of 
satisfaction  finds  in  the  Deity ;  and,  let  me  ask  you, 
what  is  here  to  indicate  the  loving  kindness,  com- 
passion, goodness,  long  suffering,  forbearance,  readi- 
ness to  forgive,  and  perfect  holiness,  which  our  Sa- 
viour has  taw^ht  us  to  reverence  in  the  evcrliving 
God,  and  which  alone  can  be  the  object  of  a  pure 
love,  pious  gratitude,  and  ardent  devotion  ?  If  God 
were  the  angry,  vindictive  being,  represented  in  this 
system,  it  would  be  impossible  to  love,  and  imj  ious 
to  adore  him. 

Another  sustaining  principle  of  this  doctrine  is  the 
imputation  of  sin  and  righteousness.  Christ  is  said  to 
have  taken  upon  him  the  sins  of  men,  and  they  are 


i,fc,T.  VI.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  225 

saved  by  receiving  his  righteousness.  This  notion  is 
as  ill  founded,  as  that  concerning  justice.  Sin  is  a 
transgression  of  a  law  by  an  intelligent,  moral  agent, 
and  it  pertains  to  him  alone,  who  commits  the  trans- 
gression. Guilt  is  the  consciousness  of  having  trans- 
gressed. Neither  of  these  things  can  be  transferred  ; 
you  cannot  be  conscious  for  another,  nor  can  you  sm, 
or  be  guilty  for  another.  If  then,  neither  the  deed, 
nor  the  guilt  of  the  deed,  can  come  upon  you,  how 
can  you  suifer  the  penalty  ?  The  same  thing  holds 
on  the  other  side  ;  righteousness  consists  in  obedience 
to  the  law  of  right,  and  innocence  is  a  consciousness 
of  this  obedience.  As  one  being  can  neither  act,  nor 
be  conscious  for  another,  so  the  righteousness  of  one 
being  cannot  be  the  righteousness  of  another.  This 
is  irresistible  in  the  nature  of  things,  and  God  has  ex- 
pressly asserted  it  by  the  mouth  of  the  prophet. 
"  The  righteousness  of  the  righteous  shall  be  upon 
him  and  the  wickedness  of  the  wicked  shall  be  upon 
him."  Until  this  declaration  can  be  proved  false, 
the  imputation  either  of  sin,  or  of  righteousness,  must 
be  deemed  a  fiction. 

But  let  this  inconsistency  be  passed  over,  and  take 
it  for  granted,  that  the  notion  of  imputed  sin  is  true, 
as  set  forth  in  the  scheme  of  satisfaction.  In  what 
light  does  it  exhibit  the  character  of  God  ?  Where 
is  the  justice,  to  say  nothing  of  the  goodness  and 
mercy,  in  making  the  innocent  suffer  for  the  guilty  ? 
Could  any  but  a  cruel,  capricious,  tyrannical  being 
resort  to  such  an  expedient  for  repairing  the  breach 
of  his  law  ?  While  God  has  all  power  in  his  hands, 
29 


226  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [fart  m. 

and  can  employ  such  moans  as  he  pleases  to  reform 
and  restore  his  otfending  creatures,  does  it  argue  anj 
thing  in  his  chai'actcr,  which  can  engage  our  devout 
affection  or  reverence,  to  inflict  upon  the  innocent  a 
punishment,  which  was  due  to  the  guilty  ?  Can  you 
imagine  a  single  moral  or  religious  purpose  to  be  an- 
swered by  such  a  doctrine,  even  if  it  were  not  incon- 
sistent with  the  nature  of  righteousness  and  sin,  and 
opposed  to  the  divine  perfections  ?  Henry  Taylor 
has  said  with  great  propriety  ;  "  What  good  can 
accrue  from  punishing  the  wrong  person  rather  than 
the  right,  the  innocent  instead  of  the  guilty^  does  not 
appear  very  clear  ;  nor  does  it  appear,  that  any 
thanks  are  due  from  me  to  a  judge,  who  forgives 
me  a  sin,  that  I  did  not  commit."*  Since  tlie  trans- 
ferring of  guilt  and  righteousness  is  impossible,  God 
is  made  by  the  doctrine  of  satisfaction  a  justifier  of 
the  wicked,  which  is  an  impeachment  of  his  holiness. 
The  sinner  is  no  less  wicked  because  another  per- 
son has  suffered  ;  and  if  God  justifies  him  simply  on 
account  of  such  suffering,  he  justifies  him  while  in 
his  wickedness. 

Again,  this  doctrine  of  satisfaction  involves  another 
false  principle,  and  represents  God  as  unjust  in  re- 
quiring the  sulFcrings  of  Christ  as  a  punishment.  That 
Christ  sufiercd  for  sinners,  no  christian  has  ever  de- 


*  Ben  Mordccai's  Apology,  Vol.  ii.  p.  771. 

For  several  illustrations  of  tlir  pprnicioiis  tenclenry  of  this  doctrine  of  impu- 
tative righteousness  and  sin,  see  William  Penn's  enumeration  of  uliai  li.  rails 
its  "  Consequences  irreligious  and  irrational."  H  orks,  3d.  edit.  I  ol.  i. 
p.  41^  52, 


LET.  vi.J  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  227 

nied  nor  even  doubted.  He  might  suffer  by  his  own 
consent  from  motives  of  benevolence,  or  for  the  sake 
of  a  reward,  or  for  any  other  reason.  Suffering  by 
no  means  implies  punishment.  A  man  may  suffer, 
who  loses  a  limb,  or  meets  with  any  other  misfortune 
by  accident,  which  distresses  him  in  his  temporal 
concerns  ;  he  may  suffer  with  the  expectation  of  a 
recompense,  or  the  hope  of  communicating  relief  and 
comfort  to  his  fellow-men  ;  yet  no  punishment  will  be 
connected  with  these  sufferings.  The  line  of  distinc- 
tion IS  plainly  marked  ;  no  suffering  is  a  punishment, 
which  is  not  caused  by  some  moral  defect,  or  guilt. 
Punishment  is  the  suffering  of  a  person,  who  is  con-  j 
scious  of  guilt,  or  of  an  evil  intention  ;  and  no  suffer- 
ing is  punishment  without  this  consciousness  on  the 
part  of  the  sufferer.  As  Christ  was  a  holy  person, 
free  from  sin  and  guilt,  it  is  evident  he  could  not  be 
punished,  however  much  he  might  suffer. 

If  you  choose  to  preserve  consistency,  and  uphold 
the  doctrine  of  satisfaction  at  all  hazards,  you  must 
still  insist,  that  Christ  was  punished,  for  punishment 
only  could  satisfy  justice.  To  what  results  shall  we 
then  be  brought?  Christ  could  not  be  punished  as  a 
holy,  sinless  being,  but  only  as  a  guilty  and  wicked 
transgressor.  In  other  words,  if  the  doctrine  of  sa- 
tisfaction  be  true,  Christ  was  a  sinner.  This  was 
avowed  by  Luther  in  his  usually  plain  and  bold  man- 
ner, as  we  have  seen  in  a  former  letter.  He  says, 
that  "  Christ  according  to  the  law,  ought  to  be  hang- 
ed, for  he  sustained  the  person  of  a  sinner,  and  of  a 


228  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [^aRT  in. 

thief,  not  of  one,  but  of  all  sinners  and  thieves."* 
Calvin  also  tells  us,  that  he  died  as  a  malefactor. 
Now  as  no  person  can  be  a  sinner,  or  a  malefactor, 
who  has  not  contracted  guilt,  Christ  must  have  been 
guilty  of  sin.  To  talk  of  imputed  guilt  in  this  case  is 
to  use  words  Avithout  meaning ;  or  if  you  suppose 
them  to  have  a  meaning,  and  to  signify,  that  Christ 
was  sinful  only  as  God  made  him  such,  you  remove 
no  difficulty,  but  rather  add  new  ones.  You  resort  to 
an  impossibility,  despoil  God  of  his  justice,  and  repre- 
sent him  as  cruelly  inflicting  suiferings  on  the  inno- 
cent, which  none  but  the  guilty  deserve. 

Some  writers,  startled  at  the  thought  of  running  to 
such  a  length,  have  tried  to  reconcile  these  glaring 
absurdities.  Dr.  Clarke  and  Bishop  Stillingflieet  were 
among  this  number.  They  were  shocked  at  the  idea, 
that  God  should  punish  the  innocent  for  the  guilty  ; 
and  to  lessen  the  embarrassment.  Dr.  Clarke  imagined, 
that  it  was  no  violation  of  justice  in  God  to  permit 
Christ  to  suffer.  Bishop  Stillingfleet's  notion  was 
nearly  the  same,  but  he  explains  it  in  a  different  man- 
ner, by  saying,  that  Christ  might  oblige  himself  io  suf- 
fer. These  views  of  two  great  men  only  add  new 
weight  to  the  difficulty,  with  which  the  whole  schema 

*  Comment,  on  Gal.  iii.  13.  It  ought  to  be  observed,  however,  that  Luther 
did  not  consider  Christ  a  sinner,  because  h&  \\hA  committed  any  sin,  but  be- 
cause the  sins  of  the  world  were  laid  upon  him.  He  affirms,  nevertheless,  that 
"whatsoever  sins  I,  thou,  and  we,  all  have  done,  or  shall  do  hereafter,  they 
are  Christ's  own  sins,  as  verily  as  if  he  himself  had  done  them."  It  ought  also 
to  be  remembered,  that  Luther  is  here  arguing  the  point  against  those  whom 
he  calls  "  the  popish  sophisters,"  and  whom  he  believed  to  have  an  over- 
weening attarhineul  to  the  doctrine  of  works,  and  to  place  an  undue  value  or, 
♦  heir  own  nieritp. 


LET.  VI.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  229 

is  encumbered  ;  for  whatever  the  Deity  might  per- 
mit, and  whatever  the  Saviour  might  obHge  himself 
to  do,  the  case  is  not  altered  in  regard  to  the  nature 
of  sin,  guilt,  righteousness,  and  innocence  ;  these  re- 
main as  really  as  before  personal  qualities,  which 
cannot  be  transferred  from  one  to  another.  Whoever 
will  escape  these  embarrassments,  unravel  inconsis- 
tencies, and  build  up  a  system  honourable  to  God 
and  conducive  to  piety,  will  do  well  to  keep  more 
closely  to  the  Scriptures,  and  believe  Christ  to  have 
"  endured  the  cross  for  the  joy  that  was  set  before 
him,"  and  to  have  "  suffered  for  sins,  the  just  for  the 
unjust ;"  not  as  a  wicked  person,  but  as  righteous.* 
Such  is  the  language  of  the  New  Testament,  which 
nowhere  intimates,  that  Christ  was  punished  for  us, 
but  that  he  suffered. 

In  this  labyrinth  of  contradictions  and  false  princi- 
ples, where  are  the  yree  grace  ^luA  mercy  of  God? 
The  Scriptures  inculcate  repeatedly,  that  men  are 
saved  by  the  grace  of  God,  that  is,  by  his  free  and 
unmerited  pardon  of  their  sins.  But  the  doctrine  of 
satisfaction  insists,  that  no  such  pardon  could  be 
granted,  and  no  sinner  could  be  saved,  till  Christ,  in 
consequence  of  a  covenant,  contract,  or  bargain,  paid 
a  full  equivalent  for  sin.  Flavel  says,  "  God  stood 
upon  full  satisfaction,  and  would  not  remit  one  sin 
without  it."  Where  then,  let  the  question  be  re- 
peated, is  the  free  grace  of  God  ?  The  debt  of  sin- 
ners is  discharged,  their  redemption  is  purchased,  and 

*  Heb.  xii.  3.     1  Peter,  iii.  13. 


230  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

now  salvation  is  their  due  by  the  conditions  of  the 
covenant.  God  has  not  released  them  by  freely 
granting  pardon  as  a  gift;  he  has  received  an  equiva- 
lent for  every  thing.  Do  you  reply,  that  his  free 
grace  consists  in  his  having  entered  into  this  covenant, 
and  accepted  this  equivalent,  which  he  was  under  no 
obligation  to  do?  Such  is  the  usual  explanation,  but 
it  is  not  to  the  point.  By  no  device  or  exercise  of 
ingenuity,  can  it  be  made  out,  that  any  thing  is  freely 
given  to  a  debtor,  from  whom  the  whole  debt,  or  a 
full  equivalent  has  been  exacted  ;  nor  is  it  of  any  con- 
sequence in  what  form,  or  by  what  process,  the  dis- 
charge has  been  made.  Hence  the  scheme  of  satis- 
faction divests  the  Deity  of  his  free  grace,  or  his  dis- 
position freely  to  pardon  sin. 

The  same  is  true  in  respect  to  the  divine  mercy. 
The  exercise  of  this  attribute  always  implies  a  re- 
linquishment of  justice.  If,  then,  justice  exacts  a  ri- 
gorous satisfaction,  no  place  is  left  for  mercy.  In  the 
scheme  of  salvation,  which  we  are  now  considering, 
mercy  is  out  of  sight,  and  takes  no  part.  Flavel  says 
again,  "  'i'o  the  wrath  of  an  infinite  God  without  mix- 
ture, to  the  very  torments  of  hell,  was  Christ  deliver- 
ed, and  that  by  the  hand  of  his  Father ;"  and  Calvin 
talks  nearly  in  the  same  language.  Who  will  say 
that  he  perceives  any  thing  of  mercy  here  ?  Do  you 
cr.l!  tlie  judge  merciful,  who  pursues  a  criminal  with 
relentless  vengeance,  till  he  has  executed  on  him  the 
utmost  rigour  of  the  law  ?  In  this  light  is  the  Deity 
represented  by  this  doctrine ;  and  if  you  quench  the 
burnings  of  his  anger,  you  will  not  even  then  have 


T.ET.  VI.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  231 

space  for  a  single  beam  of  mercy;  nothing  will  re- 
main but  stern  justice  refusing  to  be  satisfied,  till  its 
severest  requisitions  are  fulfilled. 

Such  are  some  of  the  false  principles,  which  this 
doctrine  embraces,  such  its  inconsistences,  and  such 
the  unscriptural  and  irrational  views,  which  it  exhibits 
of  the  character  of  God  and  his  dealings  with  men. 
Every  reflecting  mind  must  at  once  perceive  the  per- 
nicious influence  of  such  dishonourable  views  of  our 
Maker  on  the  duties  of  piety  and  worship. 

The  Scriptures,  and  our  understanding,  command 
us  to  look  up  to  God,  as  a  Being  of  infinite  mercy, 
love,  and  kindness,  who  remembers  that  we  are  dust, 
pardons  us  freely,  accepts  us  graciously,  and  is  more 
ready  to  forgive,  than  we  are  to  repent  and  forsake 
our  sins.  These  are  the  traits  of  his  character, 
which  are  calculated  more  than  any  others,  to  enlist 
all  our  better  principles,  our  pious  sympathy,  and 
warm  affections,  in  his  service.  Take  away  his  par- 
doning mercy,  and  his  unpurchased  forgiveness,  and 
you  obscure  the  brightness  of  his  glory,  you  limit  the 
extent  of  his  love,  and  leave  nothing  to  which  depen- 
dent, helpless  sinners  can  look  up  with  confidence, 
gratitude,  and  heaitfelt  devotion.  Where  is  the  sin- 
ner's consolation,  or  his  encouragement  to  worship 
God  with  an  unwavering  trust  in  his  merciful  pardon 
of  the  penitent,  if  he  is  convinced  that  his  Maker  has 
put  the  power  of  pardon  out  of  his  hands,  and  shut 
up  the  fountains  of  his  mercy  ?  Let  every  person  act 
upon  this  conviction,  in  conformity  wiih  the  strict 
letter  and  spirit  of  the  doctrine  of  satisfaction,  and 


232  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

there  could  be  no  such  thing  as  pure  devotion,  hum- 
ble resignation,  tirm  reliance  on  the  divine  goodness, 
and  a  holy  gratitude  for  the  rich  blessings  of  unme- 
rited mercy.  The  heart  would  be  left  cold  and  de- 
solate, and  the  terrors  of  an  angry  God  would  freeze 
up  all  the  channels  of  pious  thought,  and  devout 
adoration. 

To  avoid  this  catastrophe,  it  has  been  usual  to 
paint  before  our  eyes  in  glowing  colours,  the  merits 
of  the  Saviour,  and  to  admonish  us  of  the  love  and 
gratitude,  which  we  owe  to  him  for  the  sufferings  he 
endured,  and  the  debt  he  has  paid.  That  is,  in  plain 
language,  the  Supreme  God  is  to  be  robbed  of  the 
glory  and  praise  due  to  his  noblest  and  most  lovely 
attributes,  and  these  are  to  be  transferred  to  another 
being,  who  has  consented  to  take  upon  him  the  sins 
of  men,  and  to  shield  them  from  the  bolt  of  divine 
wrath,  which  was  prepared  to  be  hurled  at  their  de- 
fenceless heads.  What  is  this  but  to  exalt  the  Sa- 
viour above  the  Creator,  and  to  exhibit  the  charac- 
ter of  the  Saviour  in  vastly  the  most  attractive  light  ? 
It  has  been  only  through  his  benevolence,  mercy- 
compassion,  and  sufferings,  that  God  has  consented  to 
save  any  of  his  creatures  from  perdition.  What  can 
demonstrate  more  clearly  than  these  facts,  the  great 
practical  evil,  and  irreligious  tendency  of  the  scheme 
of  satisfaction  ?  It  effectually  annuls  all  obligation  to 
God  ;  he  abated  nothing,  he  has  shown  us  no  favour; 
Christ  has  done  all,  and  deserves  all.  Can  any  doc- 
trine tend  to  enlighten  the  understanding,  or  purify 
the  heart,  or  exalt  the  sentiments,  which  describes 


f>ET.  vj.j  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  233 

the  Supreme  Being  as  less  merciful  and  good,  less 
compassionate  and  tender,  less  benevolent  and  kind, 
than  another,  who  acts  by  his  authority,  and  submits 
to  his  will  ?  Can  any  doctrine  reflect  greater  Indig- 
nity on  the  Almighty  Jehovah,  the  ever  Avatchful 
Parent,  who  demands  and  deserves  the  undivided  ho- 
mage, love,  gratitude,  and  service  of  every  created 
being  ? 

When  the  subject  is  examined  in  another  bearing, 
it  appears,  after  all,  that  no  security  is  left  for  sin- 
ners, although  Christ  has  suffered  to  satisfy  the  jus- 
tice of  the  Father.     Two  other  beings  still  remain, 
according  to  this  system,  who  are  equal  with  the  Fa- 
ther, namely,  the  Son  and  Holy  Spirit.     As  each  of 
these  beings  is  God,  and  has  all  the  attributes  of  the 
Father,   the  justice  of  each  must  be  satisfied^  and  the 
anger  of  each  appeased.     As  far  as  this  scheme  has 
been  unfolded,  it  provides  no  satisfaction  to  the  justice 
of  any  being  except  God  the  Father.     If  Jesus  satis- 
fied the  Father  only,  who  has  satisfied  the  Son  and 
Holy  Spirit  ?   Or  if  they  are  not  satisfied,  where  is 
the  sinner's  hope  ?  Can  the  second  and  third  persons 
of  the  trinity,   who   are  in  all  respects   equal  to  the 
first,  can  they  dispense  with  the  requisitions  of  jus- 
tice, and  pardon  offenders  by  the  simple  exercise  of 
free  grace  ?     Is  the  justice  of  the  Son  less  perfect,  or 
less  rigid,  than  that  of  the  Father  ?  If  so,  he  is  not 
equal  with  the  Father.       Is  it  affirmed,  that  his  jus- 
tice needed  no  satisfaction?    The  same  may  then  be 
affirmed  of  the  Father,  and  the  ground-work  of  the 
whole  system  will  be  destroyed. 
30 


234  TRINITY  AND  ATOJVEMEJNT.  [i'art  hi. 

No  mode  of  escaping  this  dilemma  can  be  devised, 
which  shall  keep  up  the  doctrine  of  satisfaction,  but 
to  say,  that  Christ  satisfied  himself;  and  in  regard  to 
moral  influence,  this  a\  ill  carry  us  some  degrees  be- 
yond the  point,  at  which  we  arrived  before.  We 
then  found  that  the  generous  sacrifice  of  Jesus,  in 
voluntarily  suffering  to  quell  the  rage  of  God,  and 
conciliate  his  favour  toAvards  his  creatures,  represent- 
ed him  as  an  object  vastly  more  worthy  of  our  love 
and  gratitude,  than  the  Father  of  all  things.  When 
to  this  you  add  the  willingness  of  the  Son  to  give  up 
his  own  claims,  to  relax  the  rigour  of  his  justice,  and 
to  receive  penitent  sinners  as  a  kind  benefactor,  and 
affectionate  friend,  without  turning  upon  them  the 
countenance  of  anger,  or  requiring  satisfaction,  you 
present  him  in  a  still  loftier  attitude  of  excellence 
and  loveliness.  The  glory  of  the  Father  is  totally 
eclipsed  behind  the  blazing  lustre  of  the  Son.  The 
God,  whom  all  are  taught  to  adore  and  worship  as 
infinitely  the  greatest  and  best  of  beings,  is  represent- 
ed to  us  as  a  stern  tyrant,  actuated  by  some  of  the 
worst  passions  of  men,  and  possessing  no  other  virtue 
than  vindictive  justice.  Who  could  be  so  unwise,  as 
to  trust  themselves  in  the  hands  of  such  a  being, 
whilst  there  is  another  so  much  more  compassionate, 
and  merciful,  and  good,  who  pardons  freely,  and  has 
made  such  sacrifices  to  demonstrate  his  love,  and  pur- 
chase their  salvation? 

How  different  is  this  representation  from  the  ac- 
count, which  our  vSaviour  himself  gives  of  the  cause 
of  his   coming  into  the  world.     "  God  so  loved  the 


I.KT.  VI.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  235 

world,"  said  Jesus,  "  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten 
Son,  that  whosoever  belleveth  on  him  should  not 
perish,  but  have  everlasting  life."*  We  are  here 
told,  that  the  Son  was  given  to  be  a  Saviour,  and  that 
the  cause  of  his  being  given  was  the  love  of  God ; 
but  the  doctrine  of  satisfaction  inculcates  the  idea, 
that  the  justice  and  the  anger  of  God  were  the  origi- 
nal cause  of  the  Saviour's  coming ;  and  so  far  from 
his  being  given  by  the  Father,  he  Is  described  as 
giving  himself  to  be  a  sacrifice  for  the  sins  of  men, 
and  to  purchase  their  redemption  by  paying  the 
whole  debt.  Yet  the  Scriptures  would  have  us  un- 
derstand, that  salvation  is  the  gift  of  God,  the  gift 
of  his  love  and  mercy  communicated  through  Jesus 
Christ,  whom  he  sent  to  be  a  Redeemer  and  Saviour. 
Not  that  Christ  did  not  love  the  Avorld.  His 
whole  life  was  an  office  of  love  for  the  salvation  of 
men ;  his  sufferings  were  voluntary,  and  it  was  by 
reason  of  his  great  love  for  the  world,  that  he  was 
induced  to  submit  to  them.  But  this  love  was  exer- 
cised in  doing  acts  of  kindness  and  mercy,  by  the  aid 
and  strength  of  God,  for  a  most  noble  and  benevolent 
purpose.  According  to  this  scripture  view,  we  have 
ample  grounds  for  adoring  the  majesty  and  unbound- 
ed love  of  God,  and  at  the  same  time  for  rendering  a 
profound  reverence  and  affectionate  gratitude  to  the 
Saviour,  for  the  part  he  has  acted  in  doing  the  Fa- 
ther's will,  and  opening  the  door  of  salvation  to  a 
sinful  world. 


236  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

The  infinite  nature  of  sin  is  another  feature  in  the 
doctrine  of  satisfaction,  which  was  formerly  set  forth 
in  a  conspicuous  light  bv  all  sound  writers,  but  which 
of  late  seems  to  be  left  more  in  the  shade.  Many 
have  urged  it  as  a  point  of  vital  importance,  and  af- 
fording one  of  the  strongest  arguments  for  the  deity 
of  Christ.  The  whole  matter  may  be  compressed 
into  a  single  syllogism  of  the  simplest  form.  Sin  is 
an  infinite  evil.  It  requires  an  infinite  being  to  atone 
for  such  an  evil.  Christ  atoned  for  it;  therefore, 
Christ  is  an  infinite  being,  or  God.  This  no  doubt 
would  be  very  solid  and  logical,  were  it  not  for  a  soli- 
tary defect  in  the  leading  term  of  the  syllogism. 
That  sin  is  an  infinite  evil  is  evidently  false,  and  of 
course  the  chain  of  consequences,  which  was  sup- 
posed to  hang  upon  this  position,  falls  to  the  ground. 
All  sin  is  committed  by  a  finite  being ;  and  no  such 
being  can  commit  an  infinite  act,  whether  good  or 
bad.  Besides,  if  sin  were  infinite,  every  sinful  act 
would  be  equal  in  magnitude  and  crime,  which  is  ab- 
surd. Another  consequence  of  this  doctrine,  and  a 
most  serious  one,  is,  that  if  satisfaction  for  sin  can 
only  be  made  by  an  infinite  being,  God  himself  must 
have  suffered  for  sin,  as  he  is  the  only  infinite  being 
in  the  universe.  Nor  is  this  consequence  imaginary 
or  theoretical ;  it  has  been  made  a  theme  with  indis- 
creet and  overzealous  j)rcachers,  for  magnifying  the 
merits  of  the  Saviour,  and  enlisting  the  passions  by 
vivid  representations  of  the  intense  sufferings,  which 
must  have  been  endured  by  an  Almighty  Surety.  Is 
it   possible,  that  any  mind  can  liave  a  just  sense  of 


LET.  VI.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  237 

the  holy  character  of  God,  or  be  imbued  with  the 
spirit  of  exalted  and  rational  piety,  which  can  endure 
a  thought  so  shocking?  What  devout  sentiments  and 
feelings,  or  what  reverence  and  adoration,  can  that 
doctrine  awaken,  which  represents  the  God  of  the 
universe  as  dwelling  upon  the  earth,  suffering  the 
abuses  of  wicked  men,  and  dying  on  a  cross?  Can 
such  a  doctrine  have  any  purifying  influence  ?  Yet 
this  doctrine  must  be  true,  if  an  infinite  being  has  suf- 
fered to  satisfy  infinite  justice,  and  take  away  the 
guilt  of  infinite  sin.* 

The  doctrine  of  election  and  reprobation  is  another, 
which  has  lost  much  ground  of  late,  but  which  is 
still  retained  by  every  consistent  Calvinist,  and  close- 
ly linked  in  the  scheme  of  satisfaction ;  so  closely  in- 
deed, that  the  efficacy  of  Christ's  death  is  confined 
exclusively  to  the  "  elect,  whom  God  did  from  all 
eternity  decree  to  justify."  Witsius  has  a  long  ar- 
gument to  prove  this  tenet,  and  concludes  by  saying, 
that  it  would  be  "  unworthy  of  the  wisdom,  goodness, 
and  justice  of  God  to  exact  and  receive  satisfaction 
from  his  most  beloved  Son,  for  those,  whom  he 
neither  gav&,  nor  wanted  to  give  to  his  Son,  and  whom 

*  Bishop  Magee  is  very  indignant,  that  Dr.  Priestley  should  charge  this  doc- 
trine of  infinite  sin  upon  the  orthodox  scheme  of  atonement.  "  That  someftw 
indeed,  have  argued  thus,"  he  remarks,  "is  ctrlainly  to  be  admiiled  and  la- 
mented. But  how  poorly  such  men  have  reasoned,  it  needed  not  the  acuteness 
of  Dr.  Priestley  to  discover.  On  their  own  principle  the  reply  is  obvious  ;  that 
sin  being  committed  by  a  finite  creature,  requires  only  a  finite  satisfaction,  foi 
which  purpose  a  finit°  person  might  be  an  adequate  victim." — Dissert.  No. 
xiii.'  But  we  have  already  seen,  that  Dr.  Magee's  plan  of  atonement  retains 
no  more  than  a  shadow,  and  a  very  faint  shadow  of  orthodoxy. 


238  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  lU. 

he  decreed  to  consign  to  everlasting  confinement,  that 
they  might  suffer  in  their  own  persons  the  demerit  of 
their  crimes."*  Without  going  into  the  author's 
argument,  the  question  would  seem  here  most  natu- 
rally to  arise,  that  since  Christ  is  God,  or,  as  you 
have  called  him,  an  Almighty  Surety,  how  is  it  pos- 
sible, that  the  infinite  satisfaction  of  such  a  being 
should  not  have  taken  away  all  sin  ?  Justice  is  no 
more  than  infinite,  and  when  this  is  satisfied  by  an 
infinite  sacrifice,  its  demands  are  at  an  end  ;  if  a  single 
sin  can  be  removed  by  such  a  sacrifice,  all  the  sins 
Avliich  ever  have  been,  or  ever  can  be  committed, 
must,  in  the  necessity  of  the  case,  be  equally  re- 
moved. 

But  our  duty  calls  us  at  present  to  the  tendency 
of  this  doctrine,  as  making  a  branch  of  the  scheme  of 
satisfaction.  And  in  this  respect,  the  case  is  too  plain 
to  need  many  words.  The  account  of  the  matter  is 
this.  God  so  formed  his  creatures  originally,  that 
they  must  become  the  slaves  of  sin  ;  for  notwith- 
standing the  covenant  of  works,  of  which  divines  say 
so  much  and  the  Scriptures  so  little,  God  knew  this 
covenant  would  be  broken.  Forseeing  this,  he  re- 
solved, even  before  the  covenant  was  made,  to  rescue 
a  certain  portion  from  the  penalty  of  transgression. 
Hence  he  entered  into  another  covenant  with  the 
Son,  by  which  he  agreed  to  accept  his  sufferings,  for 
a  specified  number,  and  determined,  as  we  arc  told, 


*  Erononiy  of  the   Covenants,  p.  359.     Chapter  on  the   Persons  for  uhom 
Christ  engaged  and  satisfied. 


iSET.  VI.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  239 

for  "  the  praise  of  his  glorious  justice,"  to  consign 
the  remainder  to  everlasting  torments.  And  what 
gives  this  singular  act  a  still  more  extraordinary  as- 
pect is,  that  Christ  is  acknowledged  to  have  been  as 
able  and  willing  to  save  all,  as  part,  had  it  thus  been 
the  will  and  the  good  pleasure  of  God. 

Now  in  what  character  does  this  exhibit  our  holy 
and  heavenly  Father  ?  His  justice  has  been  satisfied 
to  its  utmost  limits,  and  yet  he  refuses  to  let  his  pur- 
chased favour  flow  to  any  but  a  selected  number, 
whom  he  has  arbitrarily  chosen,  without  any  regard 
to  their  merits  or  superiour  claims.  Allow  that  the 
attributes  of  God,  and  all  the  rich  blessings  of  his 
providence,  loudly  call  upon  us  for  praise,  and  reve- 
rence, and  gratitude ;  nevertheless,  let  the  question 
be  seriously  answered,  whether  a  single  trait  of  his 
character  is  here  displayed,  which  does  not  essen- 
tially diminish  the  force  of  such  a  call?  Shall  they, 
who  are  condemned,  praise  him  for  plunging  them 
into  eternal  misery  ?  Is  this  consistent  with  human 
nature?  Do  we  love  those,  who  seek  our  ruin? 
Would  it  not  be  an  insult  and  mockery  to  demand  of 
any  one  in  the  midst  of  liis  sufferings  to  love  and  hon- 
our the  author  of  his  wretchedness  ? 

And  again,  shall  they  who  are  saved  praise  God 
for  their  fortunate  rescue?  Surely  not;  it  is  not  to 
him  they  are  indebted;  he  has  released  nothing;  he 
has  demanded  and  received  a  full  satisfaction  with- 
out mercy  or  favour ;  the  righteous  owe  every  thing 
to  their  Surety,  but  nothing  to  their  God.  Where 
then  is  the  cause  of  praise,  of  devotion,  or  of  any  duty 


240  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

to  our  Maker?  There  is  none.  These  reflections 
must  occur  to  every  mind,  and  need  not  be  dwelt 
upon.  Can  any  thing  be  more  certain,  than  the  ten- 
dency of  such  a  doctrine  to  destroy  all  piety,  love  of 
God,  and  devout  adoration  of  the  divine  majesty,  if 
its  pernicious  influence  were  not  counteracted  by  the 
dictates  of  the  understanding,  the  authority  of  the 
moral  sense,  and  the  imposing  attributes  of  the  di- 
vine nature  ? 

On  this  topic,  as  well  as  many  others  intimately 
related  to  this  part  of  the  subject,  much  more  might 
be  said.  The  above  hints  will  serve  to  show  in  what 
light  the  doctrine  of  satisfaction  places  the  character 
of  God,  and  what  must  be  its  natural  influence  on  the 
devout  affections  of  men,  and  on  all  the  duties  of 
piety. 


LETTER  VII. 


On  the  popalar  Doctrine  of  Atonement  as  aff'ecting  the 
practical  Virtues. 


In  my  previous  remarks  on  atonement,  I  have 
taken  pains  to  exhibit  this  doctrine  in  some  of  the 
numerous  forms  in  which  different  sects  of  christians 
have  been  accustomed  to  view  it,  and  to  delineate,  as 
accurately  as  I  could,  the  portraiture,  which  has  been 


:,ET.  vii.'j  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  241 

drawn  and  recognized  by  Calvinists.  In  performing 
this  task,  my  design  has  been  twofold ;  first,  to  show 
that  Unitarians  do  not  deserve  the  reproach  of  singu- 
larity and  rashness,  which  the  orthodox  are  so  fond 
of  bestowing  on  them  for  their  opinions  on  this  sub- 
ject, since  these  opinions  correspond  in  every  essen- 
tial respect  with  those  of  a  large  portion  of  Trinita- 
rians; and,  secondly,  to  trace  the  influence  of  the 
doctrine  of  satisfaction,  or  what  is  sometimes  called 
the  popular  doctrine  of  atonement,  as  it  relates  to 
the  duties  both  of  piety  and  of  morality. 

The  first  part  of  this  design  has  been  accomplish- 
ed, and  the  second  commenced.  In  my  last  letter 
was  examined  the  influence  of  this  doctrine  on  the 
duties  and  exercises  of  piety  and  devotion;  and  I 
willingly  leave  it  to  the  impartial  reader  to  decide, 
whether,  in  its  relation  to  these  objects,  it  has  not 
been  found  wanting.  It  is  left  to  every  one  to  judge, 
whether  a  doctrine,  which  is  built  on  the  position, 
that  God  created  men  with  a  necessary  aversion  to 
all  good,  and  inclination  to  all  evil ;  which  teaches, 
that  the  God  of  heaven  is  an  angry,  vindictive  being, 
who  exacts  a  rigid  obedience  from  creatures  to  whom 
he  has  given  no  power  to  obey ;  whether  a  doctrine, 
which  robs  the  Almighty  of  his  loveliest  attributes, 
by  making  him  insist  on  a  full  equivalent,  an  entire 
discharge  of  the  debt  incurred  by  transgressors,  and 
which  represents  him  as  demanding  the  suflerings  and 
punishment  of  an  innocent  and  holy  being  as  a  satis- 
faction to  his  justice,  and  a  means  of  appeasing  his 
wrath,  before  he  will  extend  to  them  his  mercy  and 
31 


242  TRINITY  A^D  ATONEMENT.  [part  in. 

forgiveness;  whether  a  doctrine,  which  refers  our 
rescue  from  moral  death,  and  even  the  possibility  of 
salvation  and  future  glory,  to  the  benevolence  and 
willing  sacrifice  of  this  being,  who  suffered  and  died, 
and  which  thus  exalts  him  in  every  adorable  excel- 
lence above  the  Creator  of  the  universe;  a  doctrine, 
which,  although  it  provides  an  infinite  satisfaction, 
leaves  God  unsatisfied,  and  represents  him  as  con- 
signing a  large  portion  of  his  creatures  to  endless  and 
irremediable  perdition,  from  which  they  have  neither 
power  nor  means  to  escape, — I  say,  it  may  be  left  to 
the  judgment  of  every  fair  minded  reader,  whether 
such  a  doctrine  is  calculated  to  kindle  the  holy  flame 
of  piety,  or  of  love  and  affectionate  reverence  to  our 
Maker.  Does  it  not  rather  exhibit  him  in  a  charac- 
ter, which  no  good  man  can  respect,  and  no  pious 
heart  can  love  ? 

It  now  remains  to  consider  this  doctrine  as  it  affects 
the  character  and  conduct  of  men  in  their  social  re- 
lations. What  is  its  power  to  strengthen  the  bonds 
and  preserve  the  harmony  of  society,  to  scatter  the 
seeds  and  cherish  the  growth  of  charity?  What  is 
its  power  to  promote  the  love  of  neighbours  and 
friends,  to  call  out  the  gentler  virtues  of  sympathy, 
mercy,  gratitude,  to  subdue  the  passions  and  mode- 
rate the  desires,  to  teach  man  forbearance,  forgive- 
ness of  injuries,  a  disregard  of  self,  and  a  disinteres- 
ted good  will  towards  others?  Has  the  doctrine  of 
satisfaction  any  sanctifying  influence  in  attaining 
these  ends,  or  in  setting  up  the  standard  of  good  mo- 


r.ET.  VII.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  "243 

rals  in  the  lives  and  hearts  of  men  ?  To  this  inquiry 
I  now  proceed. 

In  the  first  place,  it  might  with  safety  be  laid  down 
as  a  general  position,  that  a  doctrine,  which  affords 
such  feeble  aids  to  piety,  cannot  exert  imich  power  in 
the  cause  of  morality.  It  is  not  to  be  expected,  that  a 
doctrine,  which  presents  so  few  motives  to  the  love 
of  God,  will  lend  much  encouragement  to  the  love 
of  men.  Morals  and  piety  spring  from  the  same 
source.  All  human  virtue,  as  far  as  it  depends  on 
motives  distinct  from  immediate  interest,  or  immedi- 
ate happiness,  has  its  foundation  in  the  character  of 
God ;  or  rather,  in  the  views  entertained  of  his  cha- 
racter. The  conduct  of  men,  who  act  from  reflec- 
tion and  principle,  Avill  be  such  as  they  conceive  to 
be  consistent  with  the  attributes,  the  dispensations, 
and  the  will  of  the  Deity.  In  the  acts  of  praise  and 
devotion,  or  in  any  deeds  of  piety,  they  will  be  mo- 
ved by  the  same  general  causes,  as  in  the  duties  of 
morals.  The  will  of  God,  the  love  of  his  excellence, 
the  fear  of  his  displeasure,  and  the  hope  of  his  re- 
wards, will  be  equally  the  motives  to  our  prayers  and 
penitence,  our  praise  and  gratitude,  and  to  our  right- 
eous conduct  as  members  of  the  social  compact. 
Hence  it  is,  that  the  doctrine  of  satisfaction,  just  in 
proportion  as  it  weakens  the  obligation  of  piety,  will 
destroy  the  tone  of  the  moral  feelings,  and  diminish 
the  inducements  to  the  practical  virtues. 

If  we  go  into  particulars,  we  shall  find  this  conclu- 
sion supported  in  its  broadest  latitude.  The  reli- 
gion of  Jesus  reveals  to  us  a  future  state  of  being; 


244  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT,  [parthi. 

it  tells  US  of  rewards  for  the  good,  and  of  punish- 
ments for  the  Avicked  in  that  state  ;  it  tells  us  also, 
of  a  preparation  for  the  blessings  of  the  future,  Avhich 
consists  in  a  freedom  from  sin.  "  Without  holiness 
no  man  shall  see  the  Lord."  It  is,  then,  an  inquiry 
of  no  little  moment,  how  this  preparation  is  to  be 
made.  How  are  we  to  escape  the  guilt  of  sin,  and 
become  holy  ?  What  have  we  to  do  in  this  work,  and 
what  are  our  guides  ?  If  we  have  nothing  to  do,  we 
may  be  at  ease ;  if  we  have  a  part  to  act,  it  is  a 
concernment  of  infinite  interest  to  us,  that  we  know 
what  it  is,  and  be  not  idle.  Those  who  read  the 
Scriptures  cannot  fail  to  discover,  that  we  have  much 
to  do,  and  that  our  duties  are  of  tw  o  kinds,  as  per- 
taining to  God,  and  to  inan.  We  have  before  seen 
how  little  aid  the  doctrine  of  satisfaction  affords  to 
the  former ;  and  it  will  soon  be  seen,  that  it  is  equal- 
ly defective  in  respect  to  the  latter. 

No  higher  model  can  be  presented  to  our  imitation, 
than  the  example  of  the  Deity;  and  to  this  example 
we  arc  in  many  instances  referred  in  the  Scriptures, 
It  was  the  injunction  of  our  Saviour,  "Be  ye  merci- 
ful, as  your  Father  also  is  merciful  ;"  and  again,  "  Be 
ye  perfect,  even  as  your  Father  in  heaven  is  per- 
fect." In  other  words,  he  would  have  us  imitate  the 
example  of  our  heavenly  Father,  as  far  as  it  is  possi- 
ble for  us  in  our  present  state,  as  a  means  of  virtue 
and  a  preparation  for  his  future  service. 

Let  this  rule  be  applied  in  one  or  two  particulars 
only,  as  for  instance,  the  exercise  of  niercy  and  Jor- 
giveness,  and  see  to  what  conclusions   we  shall   be 


r,ET.  VII.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  245 

brought.  From  the  calvinistic  views  of  atonement, 
what  do  we  learn  respecting  the  mercy  of  God?  We 
are  told,  that  all  men,  in  transgressing  the  laws  of 
their  Maker,  have  excited  against  them  his  anger, 
that  he  exacts  a  rigorous  punishment  without  regard 
to  the  weakness  of  his  creatures,  or  their  proneness 
to  err  from  indiscretion,  ignorance,  or  precipitancy ; 
and  that  he  shows  no  symptoms  of  lenity  on  account 
of  their  originally  depraved  nature,  or  the  tempta- 
tions and  calamities,  which  attack  and  oppress  them. 
No,  his  demands  are  imperious,  he  yields  not  to  com- 
passion, but  insists  on  a  full  satisfaction,  either  in  the 
eternal  ruin  of  the  offenders,  or  in  the  equivalent 
sufferings  of  a  substitute.  The  cries  of  mercy  are 
then  heard,  that  is,  when  there  is  no  room  for  mercy, 
and  the  unhappy  objects  of  divine  wrath  are  saved 
from  perdition. 

Now,  suppose  this  example  to  be  followed  among 
men,  and  that  all,  who  have  the  power,  should  inflict 
a  condign  punishment  on  every  transgressor  of  a  hu-  ! 
man  law,  unless  his  redemption  were  purchased  by 
the  tantamount  sufferings  of  another;  or  suppose 
every  individual  to  pursue  with  vengeance  every 
other  indiv  idual,  who,  eitijcr  by  accident  or  any  other 
cause,  should  encroach  upon  a  civil  or  private  right, 
and  tliis  without  any  regard  to  the  capacity  or  cir- 
cumstances of  the  transgressor.  Such  a  system  of 
exaction  and  punishment  would  be  in  strict  imitation 
of  the  example  of  the  Doi^y,  as  set  forth  in  the  doc- 
trine under  discussion.  Do  you  see  any  thing  in  it 
advantageous  to  the  interests  of  society,  or  calculated 


246  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

to  ameliorate  the  condition  of  men  ?  Do  you  behold 
any  thing,  which  can  soften  the  temper,  humanize 
the  heart,  or  draw  out  the  tender  and  amiable  traits 
of  our  nature  ?  So  far  from  it,  that  the  very  linea- 
ments of  mercy  are  obliterated  from  the  character 
of  God,  and  must  be  so  from  the  character  of  men. 
if  they  copy  this  example. 

Turn  next  to  the  divine  command  of  Jbrgiveness. 
How  does  this  exalted  virtue  appear  in  the  conduct 
of  the  Almighty  towards  his  creatures?  According 
to  the  satisfaction  scheme,  he  forgives  no  one  until  he 
has  received  a  full  reparation.  That  is,  he  forgives 
nothing,  for  there  can  be  nothing  to  forgive  after  a 
reparation  is  made.  Notwithstanding  it  is  one  of  the 
golden  precepts  of  the  religion  of  Jesus,  that  men 
shall  forgive  their  brethren;  notwithstanding  w^e  are 
required  to  ask  in  our  prayers,  that  our  heavenly 
Father  will  "  forgive  our  trespasses,  as  we  forgive 
those  who  trespass  against  us  ;"  notwithstanding  he 
has  repeatedly  declared  his  long  suffering,  and  his 
willingness  to  forgive  the  sincerely  penitent ;  yet,  we 
are  here  told,  that  he  will  not  bear  with  them,  will 
not  forgive,  till  they  have  been  punished  to  the  ut- 
most. 

Let  this  example  of  God  be  the  rule  of  human  con- 
duct. Let  men  refuse  to  forgive  their  brethren  an 
injury,  till  they  have  received  such  a  satisfaction  as 
they  may  justly  demand,  and  pursue  all  delinquents 
into  the  miseries  of  a  prison  or  of  death.  It  is  true, 
they  will  do  no  more  than  insist  on  the  stern  demands 
of  justice,  by  executing  the  rigours  of  the  law :   but 


r.KT.  VII.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  247 

they  will  at  the  same  time  shut  out  the  hght  of  mer- 
cy and  forgiveness  from  the  human  breast,  and  banish 
the  numerous  train  of  virtues,  which  are  their  con- 
stant attendants,  and  which  afford  the  greatest  solace 
to  the  pious  mind,  and  the  strongest  incentives  to 
good  morals.  Other  instances  might  be  adduced  to 
illustrate  this  part  of  the  subject,  but  these  two  are 
enough. 

To  obviate  these  serious  consequences,  it  is  said, 
that  the  justice  of  God  is  eternal  and  perfect,  and  as 
such  must  be  satisfied  whenever  it  is  violated.  This 
is  a  false  conclusion,  for  the  justice  of  God  is  not 
more  eternal  and  perfect,  than  the  justice  of  man. 
Justice  is  a  single  quality,  and  admits  of  no  degrees. 
Justice  is  not  one  thing  in  God,  and  another  in  man  ; 
it  is  the  same  in  both.  Its  demands  in  one  case, 
therefore,  are  the  same  as  in  the  other  ;  and  if  any 
argument  can  be  drawn  from  the  nature  of  justice  to 
prove,  that  God  cannot  forgive  till  all  its  require- 
ments are  answered,  the  same  Avill  hold  in  respect  to 
men.  And,  moreover,  if  man  can  forgive,  while  the 
breach  of  justice  is  unrepaired,  and  God  cannot,  it 
will  be  allowing  to  men  a  greater  power,  than  to  the 
Deity  himself.  In  short,  if  human  laws  were  to  be 
framed,  and  men  to  act,  in  conformity  with  the  con- 
duct of  God,  described  in  the  system  we  oppose,  the 
strongest  barriers  to  vice  would  be  broken  down,  the 
amiable  and  noblest  virtues  Avould  have  no  space  for 
action,  and  society,  if  society  there  could  be,  would 
exhibit  little  else  than  a  boisterous  contest  of  selfish- 
ness, ingratitude,  pride,  and  power. 


248  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  iin 

If  there  be  any  one  principle  In  man,  which  impels 
him  to  rectitude  of  conduct,  more  forcibly  than  ano- 
ther, it  is  a  sense  of  personal  responsibility  and  moral 
obligation.  This  principle  cannot  exist  in  the  mind  of 
him,  who  sincerely  believes,  that  an  infinite  satisfac- 
tion has  been  made  for  his  sins.  If  a  man  is  convin- 
ced, that  he  is  totally  depraved,  and  can  do  nothing 
of  himself,  and  that  all  his  evil  deeds  have  been 
transferred  to  another,  who  has  atoned  for  them,  or 
removed  their  guilt  in  the  sight  of  God;  or,  Avhich  is 
the  same  thing,  if  he  believes  another  has  become 
responsible  for  him,  and  taken  upon  himself  the  con- 
sequences of  his  sins,  where  can  be  this  man's  con- 
sciousness of  personal  guilt,  or  of  personal  responsi- 
bility ?  Again,  if  he  believes  that  he  has  no  power 
of  himself  to  obey  the  laws  of  God,  and  reform  his 
sinful  nature,  but  that  he  is  to  be  purified,  pardoned, 
and  accepted,  in  consequence  of  the  obedience  of 
another,  where  is  any  room  left  for  a  sense  of  moral 
obligation  ? 

Indeed,  if  this  doctrine  of  an  infinite  atonement  by 
an  Almighty  surety  be  true,  it  most  effectually  nulli- 
fies all  the  precepts  and  sanctions  of  the  Scriptures. 
Tliis  is  so  plain,  that  it  seems  hardly  to  admit  of  an 
illustration  ;  for  what  can  be  the  value  of  precepts^ 
which  cannot  be  reduced  to  practice,  or  of  sanctions, 
Avhich  can  have  no  influence  on  the  mind  ?  What  is 
the  authority  or  the  use  of  commands,  which  cannot 
be  voluntarily  obeyed,  and  even  the  obedience  of 
which  could  produce  no  change  in  our  condition? 
Why  should  we  repent  of  sins,  which  have  been  im- 


LET.  vii.J  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  249 

puted  to  another,  and  can  never  be  laid  to  our  charcre. 
These  are  not  idle  questions,  nor  questions  of  mere 
speculation ;  they  have  a  momentous  bearing  on  all 
that  is  practical  in  the  Gospel  scheme.  Repentance 
and  obedience  constitute  the  substance  of  the  practi- 
cal part  of  the  Scriptures,  and  if  the  foundations  of 
these  be  unsettled,  nothing  remains  upon  which  to 
erect  the  structure  of  virtue. 

The  truth  is,  that  this  doctrine  carries  us  back  to 
a  state  of  nature,  and  resolves  all  moral  duties  into 
motives  of  expediency.  Men  cannot  act  with  refe- 
rence to  a  future  state,  who  believe  their  future  des- 
tiny fixed,  as  all  must  believe,  that  hold  to  the  calvi- 
nistic  notion  of  atonement.  Were  their  practice  to 
correspond  with  their  faith,  private  interest  would 
then  be  the  ruling  motive  to  virtue,  and  men  would 
do  good,  as  far  as  it  should  contribute  to  their  imme- 
diate benefit,  and  no  farther.  They  might  refrain 
from  some  of  the  heinous  offences,  which  endanger 
the  peace  of  society,  because  any  disorder  in  the  body 
politic  would  necessarily  be  an  infringement  on  their 
privileges,  and  an  injury  to  themselves  ;  but  there 
would  be  no  moral  bars  to  resist  the  encroachments 
of  power,  no  sedative  influence  on  the  passions,  no 
control  to  unlicensed  ambition,  no  spur  to  the  gene- 
rous virtues. 

Even  the  aids,  which  natural  religion  affords  to 
practical  goodness,  could  hardly  be  said  to  exist;  for 
in  natural  religion  the  will  of  God,  as  far  as  it  can  be 
understood  from  the  light  of  reason  and  conscience, 
presents  a  strong  motive  to  a  reflecting  mind  :  and 
32 


250  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT,  [part  in. 

the  glimmerings  of  nature  shadow  forth  a  future 
state  with  sufficient  distinctness,  to  make  this  an  in- 
ducement to  act  for  something  more  than  the  pre- 
sent. But  the  person,  who  believes  in  an  infinite 
atonement  for  sin,  and  its  concomitant  doctrines,  can 
never  reasonably  be  influenced  by  any  rules  of  duty? 
which  proceed  from  a  consideration  of  the  divine 
will,  or  which  receive  their  sanctions  from  a  prospect 
of  futurity.  For  let  the  will  of  God  be  what  it  may, 
and  let  the  certainty  of  a  future  retribution  be  de- 
monstrated with  ever  so  much  clearness,  yet  no  ra- 
tional man  can  act  from  these  motives,  while  he  is 
sure  that  his  sentence  is  past,  and  that  he  is  either 
condemned  as  incorrigible,  or  released  from  all  possi- 
ble responsibility  and  danger,  by  the  infinite  satisfac- 
tion of  Christ. 

The  enjoyment  of  the  present  will  be  all  that  can 
concern  him,  and  he  will  order  his  life  accordingly. 
All  men  will  seek  their  happiness ;  but  how  few  of 
those  who  are  not  guided  by  the  principles  of  a  pure 
religion,  know  in  what  their  true  happiness  consists. 
A  single  glance  at  the  conduct  of  men  under  present 
circumstances,  is  enough  to  prove  how  imperfectly 
they  judge,  even  with  the  light  and  sanctions  of  a  di- 
vine religion  ;  but  when  this  light  becomes  darkness, 
and  these  sanctions  powerless,  as  they  do  in  the 
scheme  of  an  infinite  atonement,  it  is  easy  to  conceive 
how  much  more  difficult  it  would  be  to  attain  just 
apprehensions  of  the  nature  of  human  virtue  and 
hapf)iness. 

Wise  men,  without  doubt,  may  even  then  be  vir- 


LET.  vn.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  251 

tuous  to  a  certain  degree,  not  because  they  consider 
it  a  duty,  but  because  they  find  virtue  more  condu- 
cive than  vice  to  their  present  well  being.  But  what 
will  you  do  with  the  unwise,  lovers  of  the  world  and 
its  follies,  slaves  to  their  appetites  and  votaries  ol 
pleasure,  who  are  so  far  deluded  as  to  imagme  them- 
selves happy  in  their  iniquities,  and  so  far  blinded  and 
debased,  as  to  wish  for  no  higher  attainments  or  bet- 
ter enjoyments  than  these  afford  ?  If  you  could  arouse 
them  to  a  sense  of  their  moral  dignity,  you  must  de- 
spair of  turning  them  to  a  better  course  by  any  ar- 
guments of  persuasion  or  terror  drawn  from  the 
doctrine  of  satisfaction.  If  you  start  with  the  fun- 
damental premiseiB,  that  their  doom  is  sealed  by  the 
decrees  of  heaven,  and  that  the  burden  of  their  sins 
rests  on  one,  whose  redeeming  power  is  infinite,  you 
will  search  in  vain  for  any  arguments,  which  will 
touch  their  hopes  or  fears,  convince  their  under- 
standing, or  descend  to  their  conscience. 

Even  admitting  the  Gospel  to  have  authority  as 
containing  revealed  truths,  no  possible  benefit  could 
be  derived  from  its  practical  rules.  Its  "  exceeding 
great  and  precious  promises,"  of  which  the  Apostle 
speaks,  could  afford  no  encouragement.  The  promise 
of  pardon  to  the  penitent  sinner,  of  divine  assistance 
to  those  who  ask,  and  of  future  rewards  to  the  obe- 
dient ;  these  high  incitements  to  practical  goodness, 
these  cheering  consolations  under  every  trial,  these 
strong  inducements  to  patient  submission,  would  be 
deprived  of  their  power.  Repentance  would  be  no- 
(hing,   obedience    nothing,  divine    aid    unnecessary. 


252  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  iii. 

Threatenings  could  have  no  terror,  commands  no  au- 
thority. For  why  re[)ent  or  obey,  why  be  moved 
by  threatenings  or  commands  when  you  arc  conscious, 
that  these  can  have  no  bearing  on  your  ultmiate  des- 
tiny? Thus  it  is,  that  the  Scriptures  become  a  useless 
book  in  the  hands  of  him,  who  sees  the  price  of  all 
his  sins  fully  paid  in  the  imputed  righteousness  of 
Christ.* 

Nor  does  the  evil  end  here.  The  consistent  be- 
liever of  this  doctrine  will  hold  himself  under  no  ob- 
ligation to  rest  satisfied  with  its  mere  negative  influ- 
ence, which  goes  only  to  show  him  the  folly  of  at- 
tempting to  do  any  good.  With  equal  force  it  will 
prove  to  him  the  innocency  of  evil.  Some,  indeed, 
who  have  ventured  to  follow  their  faith  whither  it 


*  The  following  quotation  from  Heivey,  a  defender  of  the  satisfaction 
scheme,  contains  plain  language.  "  The  debt  of  penal  suffering,"  says  he, 
"  and  debt  of  perfect  obedience,  are  fully  discharged  by  our  divine  sure- 
ty, so  that  we  are  no  longer  under  Ike  nestssity  of  obeying,  to  obtain  an  exemp- 
tion from  punishment."  See  Carpenttrs  Unitarianism  the  Doctrina  of  the  Gos- 
pel, 2nd  edit.  p.  346. 

This  is  the  true  state  of  the  case,  and  an  honest  acknowledgement.  How 
such  a  doctrine,  even  in  the  partial  eyes  of  its  abettors,  can  be  discovered  to 
redound  to  good  morals,  is  a  query  whose  depth  it  may  well  employ  their  wis- 
dom to  fathom. 

Calvin  comes  to  the  same  end,  but  by  a  shorter  process, — not  only  by  ma- 
king obedience  unnecessary,  but  by  depriving  us  of  the  power  of  obeying. 
"  We  are  moved  from  within,*'  he  observes,  *'  by  no  thought  to  do  well.  Where- 
fore, I  detest  those,  who  ascribe  to  us  any  freedom  of  tvill,  by  which  we  may 
prepare  ourselves  to  receive  the  grace  of  God  ;  or,  by  which  we  may  of  our- 
selves co-operate  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  may  be  given  us."  Calvini 
Traclaliis  Theologici.  p.  90  ;  as  quoted  by  Professor  Norton  in  his  "  Views  of 
Calvinism,"  in  the  Christian  Disciple,  vol.  iv.  p.  250.  Whoever  would  know 
what  Calvinism  is,  as  it  has  been  understood  by  those,  who  were  considered 
leaders  in  this  faith,  will  find  its  prominent  features  delineated  with  great  dis- 
crimination and  judgment  in  the  above  article. 


i,ET.  VII.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  253 

naturally  leads  them,  have  openly  asserted,  "  That 
they  cannot  do  any  thing  which  is  displeasing  to  God, 
or  prohibited  by  the  law."*  In  reality,  there  are  no 
sins,  for  nothing  can  be  done,  which  God  has  not  de- 
creed ;  nor  can  he  condemn  evil  deeds,  for  which 
Christ  has  made  a  full  atonement.  Or,  in  the  tech- 
nical language  of  school  divinity,  "the  elect  cannot 
fall  from  grace."  This,  to  be  sure,  is  a  broad  prin- 
ciple, but  it  is  radically  interwoven  with  the  doc- 
trine ;  and  the  scholastic  theologues  Avere  consistent. 
Why  should  it  not  be  acted  upon  by  those  who  hold 
to  the  doctrine,  as  much  as  any  other  principle  in  re- 
ligion ?  To  a  rational  man,  with  such  a  faith,  it  must 
be  considered  as  good  a  rule  of  action  as  any  in  the 
Scriptures ;  for  all  actions  will  be  alike  to  him  in  the 
end  ;  that  is,  he  will  be  responsible  for  none,  and  the 
call  of  present  interest  is  the  only  voice  of  wisdom. 
View  this  presumption  of  personal  assurance  of  sal- 
vation through  the  electing  grace  of  God,  and  the  in- 
finite merits  of  Christ,  as  it  relates  to  another  feature 
of  the  subject,  on  which  its  advocates  have  dwelt  with 
much  complacency  and  apparent  delight.  Edwards 
tells  us,  that  "  The  sight  of  hell  torments  will  exalt 
the  happiness  of  the  saints  forever.  It  will  not  only 
make  them  more  sensible  of  the  greatness  and  free- 
ness  of  the  grace  of  God  in  their  happiness  ;  but  it 
will  really  make  their  happiness  the  greater,  as  it 
will  make  them  more  sensible  of  their  own  happi- 
ness; it  will  give  them  a  more  lively  relish  of  it;  it 

*  Mosheim's  Church  History,  vol.  v.  p.  412. 


254  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  in. 

will  make  them  prize  it  more.  When  they  see 
others,  who  were  of  the  same  nature,  and  born  under 
the  same  circumstances,  and  thej  so  distinguished,  O 
it  will  make  them  sensible  how  happy  they  are.  A 
sense  of  the  opposite  misery  in  all  cases  greatly  in- 
creases the  relish  of  any  joy  or  pleasure."*  Can  you 
imagine  any  thing  more  revolting  and  horrible  ?  It  is, 
nevertheless,  a  vivid  sketch  from  the  picture  of  Cal- 
vinism, if  by  Calvinism  we  are  to  understand  the 
faith  of  those,  who  have  always  been  considered 
leaders  of  the  sect.  Bring  this  notion  into  human 
life.  If  "  a  sense  of  the  opposite  misery  will  greatly 
increase  the  relish  of  joy"  among  the  saints  in  heaven, 
the  same  ought  to  follow  among  good  men  on  earth, 
especially  those  who  hold  themselves  to  be  freed 
from  guilt  by  the  virtue  of  an  atonement.  Then 
they  must  truly  delight  in  the  sufferings  of  their 
brethren,  and  feel  a  pleasure  in  adding  to  their  mise- 
ry. Let  me  not  do  so  much  violence  to  the  under- 
standing and  pious  feelings  of  a  single  reader,  as  to 
ask  him  to  point  out  the  practical  good  tendency  of 
an  opinion  so  monstrous,  or  of  doctrines,  with  which 
any  power  of  ingenuity,  or  any  perversion  of  judg- 
ment, could  force  it  into  an  alliance. 

Add  farther  the  doctrine  of  infinite  sin.  It  was 
observed  in  a  former  letter,  that  the  friends  of  the 
satisfaction  scheme  at  the  present  day  have  not  all 
so  clear  an  insight  into  the  infinite  nature  of  sin  as 


*  Edwards'  Sermon  on  the  Eternity  of  Hell  Torments.     See  Christian  Dis- 
ripUf  vol.  iv.  p.  260. 


LET.  vn.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  255 

formerly.  Some  of  them  have  at  last  discovered  it 
to  be  an  absurdity,  although  this  discovery  weakens 
a  very  important  link  in  the  chain  of  the  trinity,  and 
destroys  what  was  once  considered  one  of  the  strong- 
est arguments  for  the  supreme  deity  of  Christ.  For 
it  would  appear,  in  the  nature  of  things,  that  if  there 
were  not  an  infinite  evil  to  remove,  no  good  reason 
could  be  assigned  why  the  sacrifice  of  an  infinite  be- 
ing should  be  required.  Suppose  a  believer  in  the 
atonement,  therefore,  who  is  fond  of  keeping  consis- 
tency in  his  opinions,  and  with  this  view  still  clings  to 
the  old  faith  in  the  infinitude  of  sin  ;  suppose  such 
a  one  to  order  his  practice  according  to  his  belief. 
His  system  of  ethics  will  be  simple  indeed.  If  all 
sins  are  infinite,  they  are  equal  in  magnitude,  and 
consequently  equal  in  guilt.  It  is  easy  to  see  where  a 
man's  morals  will  end,  who  strives  to  keep  up  a  har- 
mony between  his  conduct  and  this  article  of  his 
faith. 

Such  are  some  of  the  evidences,  that  the  calvinis- 
tic  doctrine  of  atonement  cannot  boast  of  its  purifying 
influence  on  the  hearts  of  men,  nor  of  its  power  to  ad- 
vance the  cause  of  morals  in  society.  To  this  series  of 
statements  Calvinists  will  no  doubt  object,  that  how- 
ever plausible  in  theory,  it  is  nevertheless  gratuitous, 
and  unsupported  by  experience.  In  part  I  should 
cordially  accede  to  the  justice  of  this  reply,  for  it 
ought  to  be  a  source  of  much  joy  to  know,  that  Cal- 
vinists are  better  than  their  principles.  In  spite  of 
their  belief  in  the  absolute  wickedness  of  their  na- 
ture, and  in  their  inability  to  do  a  good  thing,  we  find 


256  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

among  them  pious  christians  and  virtuous  men.  We 
even  find  something  good  among  them  all,  reprobate 
as  well  as  elect,  notwithstanding  their  faith,  that  the 
nonelect  are  and  always  must  be  at  enmity  against 
God,  and  prone  to  all  wickedness.  It  is  agreed, 
therefore,  that  the  foregoing  deductions  are  not  en- 
tirely the  lessons  of  experience.  Let  it  be  observed, 
however,  that  this  argues  nothing  against  their  accu- 
racy. Because  the  tendency  of  the  doctrine  has 
been  resisted  by  higher  sanctions,  and  holler  motives, 
than  any  which  this  doctrine  affords,  it  is  not  to  be 
inferred,  that  no  such  tendency  exists.  The  tendency 
is  the  point  in  question,  and  to  this  only  have  my  re- 
marks been  directed. 

It  may  again  be  objected,  perhaps,  that  the  pro- 
cess of  argument  has  not  been  fairly  pursued,  since  a 
single  doctrine  has  been  taken  out  of  the  system,  and 
examined  without  regard  to  its  connexion  with  all 
the  other  parts.  To  this  I  answer,  that  every  doc- 
trine in  the  christian  scheme  ought  to  be  able  to 
stand  by  its  own  merits.  Christ  has  revealed  no 
truth,  nor  enjoined  any  rule,  which  demands  the  con- 
currence of  all  the  parts  of  his  religion  to  support  its 
weight,  and  preserve  its  consistency.  The  attributes 
of  God  are  immutable  ,:  and  with  these  attributes 
every  truth  of  religion  must  be  in  accordance.  No 
injustice,  therefore,  can  be  done  to  any  doctrine,  in 
reo-ard  to  its  individual  tendency,  by  examining  it 
alone;  but,  on  the  contrary,  if  it  will  not  bear  such 
an  examination,  either  as  taken  separately,  or  as 
united  with  kindred  doctrines,  it  leaves  a   plausible 


LET.  vrr.j  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  257 

ground  of  suspicion,  to  say  the  least,  that  something- 
is  defective  and  wrong. 

And,  furthermore,  Calvinists  must  prove,  that  there 
is  such  a  consistency  in  their  doctrines,  that  one  either 
must,  or  can  be  taken  as  connected  witli  the  others. 
To  none  but  themselves  have  they  ever  succeeded 
in  making  such  a  harmony  appear.  That  men  should 
be  totally  depraved,  and  yet  be  capable  of  any  good; 
that  they  should  be  deprived  of  power,  and  yet  be 
required  to  act  ;  that  all  their  sins  should  be  atoned 
for,  and  yet  they  should  be  responsible  for  their  con- 
duct ;  that  their  destiny  should  be  fixed  by  an  eter- 
nal decree,  and  yet  they  should  be  dealt  with  as 
having  freedom  of  will,  and  be  made  accountable  for 
their  actions  ;  these  are  paradoxes,  which  neither 
the  great  powers  and  ingenuity  of  Calvin,  nor  the 
acuteness  and  sophistry  of  Edwards,  have  been  able 
to  divest  of  their  tremendous  clouds  of  mystery  and 
darkness,  so  as  to  be  seen  clearly  by  any  other  ra- 
tional man  than  a  Calvinist. 

When  we  read  in  the  calvinistic  formulary,  that 
"  Man,  by  his  fall  into  a  state  of  sin,  hath  wholly  lost 
all  ability  of.  will  to  any  spiritual  good  accompanying 
salvation  ;  so  as  a  natural  man,  being  altogether  averse 
from  good,  and  dead  in  sin,  is  not  able  by  his  own 
strength  to  convert  himself,  or  to  prepare  himself 
thereunto  ;^^*  when  we  read  such  language,  can  we 
suppose,  that  the  man  who  assents  to  it  will  come 
upon  us  in  the  next  words,  with  the  assertion,  that  we 


*  Confession  of  Faith.  Chap.  ix.  «  f?. 

.3.3 


258  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part^  ni. 

have  "  ability  of  will,"  and  that  we  are  not  so  "  averse 
from  good,"  but  that  we  may  obey  the  commands  of 
God,  and  discharge  the  duties  of  a  christian?  Will 
such  a  man  present  to  us  the  motives,  the  promises, 
threatenings,  and  rewards  of  the  Gospel  ?  Should  a 
man  tie  our  hands  and  feet,  and  then  promise  us  a 
reward  if  we  would  walk,  and  engage  in  active  ser- 
vice, but  threaten  us  with  punishment  if  we  refused, 
should  we  think  him  any  thing  short  of  a  simpleton 
or  a  madman  ?  How  then  can  we  discover  any  unity 
of  parts  in  the  calvinistic  doctrines,  so  much  at  vari- 
ance with  those  principles  of  the  mind,  by  which 
alone  we  perceive  consistency  in  all  things  else  ?  Or 
where  is  the  impropriety  of  discussing  the  tendency 
of  any  one  of  these  doctrines,  as  distinct  from  the 
others,  when  no  connexion  or  analogy  can  be  traced 
with  any  others,  which  are  not  as  inconsistent  and 
indefensible,  as  this  doctrine  itself? 


i-ET.  vin.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  259 


LETTER  VIII. 

On    the   practical    Tendency  of  Unitarian    Views    of' 
Atonement, 

SIR, 

Having  considered  the  influence  of  the  calvinistic 
theory  of  atonement  on  piety  and  morals,  it  remains 
only  to  make  a  similar  examination  of  the  Unitarian 
views  of  this  subject.  We  have  seen,  that,  so  far  as 
the  tendency  of  an  opinion  can  have  any  bearing  on 
temper  and  conduct,  no  doctrine  can  be  more  perni- 
cious, than  that  which  encourages  sinners  to  beheve 
themselves  released  from  the  burden  of  iniquity,  and 
washed  from  the  stains  of  guilt,  by  an  infinite  atone- 
ment made  to  appease  the  wrath  and  satisfy  the  jus- 
tice of  God.  We  have  seen,  that  no  doctrine  can 
have  a  greater  power  to  debase  the  character  of  the 
Deity,  darken  his  bright  perfections,  cool  the  ardour 
of  piety,  weaken  the  inducements  to  a  holy  life,  in- 
spire a  false  confidence  on  the  part  of  the  sinner,  and 
generally  to  sustain  the  kingdom  of  evil  in  the  world. 

Among  all  the  errors,  which  have  found  their  way 
into  the  christian  scheme,  and  corrupted  its  original 
purity,  it  seems  impossible,  that  any  should  be  more 
dangerous,  or  more  unworthy  of  a  holy  religion,  than 
that  which  presents  so  easy  a  remedy  for  human 
guilt.      The  popish  doctrine  of  indulgences,  which 


260  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  m. 

(irst  roused  the  spirit  of  Luther,  and  opened  his 
eyes  to  the  enormities  of  the  Romish  Church,  was 
truly  considered  a  destroying  principle  of  all  virtue. 
But  what  does  this  doctrine  of  an  infinite  satisfaction 
promise  ?  not  a  release  from  one  sin,  but  from  all 
sins.  Tetzel  could  proifer  no  indulgence,  which 
went  beyond  the  power  of  the  Pope ;  whereas,  the 
preacher  of  this  doctrine  may  feel  himself  secure  in 
going  to  the  full  extent  of  the  power  of  the  Deity, 
for  the  atonement  which  he  preaches  was  made  by 
the  Deity  himself,  and  possesses  an  infinite  efficacy. 
Can  you  imagine  any  evils  flowing  from  the  popish 
doctrine  of  indulgences,  which  would  not  result  in  a 
much  greater  degree  from  the  notion  of  an  infinite 
satisfaction  for  sin,  if  they  were  both  equally  believ- 
ed and  applied  to  practice  ?  They  both  remove 
all  personal  responsibility,  and  leave  the  sinner  un- 
concerned for  the  past,  and  regardless  of  the  future. 
All  christians,  as  well  unitarian  as  trlnitarian,  are 
agreed  respecting  the  necessity  of  having  the  guilt  of 
sin  removed,  before  men  can  be  happy  in  the  rewards 
of  future  glory.  They  all  agree,  that  the  present 
condition  of  man  is  a  sinful  one,  and  that  the  joys  of 
the  blessed  can  never  be  known  by  any,  who  are  not 
made  perfect  in  holiness.  They  unite,  also,  in  the 
belief,  that  this  must  be  the  work  of  God  ;  for  al- 
though we  may  avoid  evil,  yet  no  human  power  can 
take  away  the  guilt  of  past  sin.  Such  is  the  condi- 
tion of  man,  and  it  is  not  important  at  present  to  in- 
quire, how  he  came  into  this  condition  ;  whether  by 
his  own  agency^ alone,  or  by  the  constitution  of  his 


LKT.  vin.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  261 

nature,  or  by  divine  appointment.  The  only  ques- 
tion is,  how  shall  he  escape  from  a  just  punishment 
of  his  guilt,  and  be  saved  ? 

Here  again  all  christians  have  a  common  faith. 
They  universally  believe  salvation  to  be  through  Je- 
sus Christ.  In  him  they  behold  a  Saviour,  whom 
God  has  qualified  and  empowered  to  be  a  Mediator 
between  himself  and  his  creatures,  and  to  perform 
an  effectual  part  in  rendering  men  worthy  of  divine 
approbation  and  forgiveness.  Unitarians  and  Trini- 
tarians believe,  that  "  God  so  loved  the  world,  that 
he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  be- 
lieveth  on  him  should  not  perish,  but  have  everlast- 
ing life;"  that  "we  have  peace  with  God  through 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;"  that  "  God  hath  given  to  us 
life  eternal,  and  this  life  is  in  his  Son ;"  that  Jesus 
has  "  obtained  for  us  eternal  redemption;"  and  that 
"  in  him  we  have  redemption  through  his  blood."* 
In  short,  every  christian  believes,  that  sin  is  taken 
away,  the  guilty  pardoned,  and  the  penitent  saved 
through  Jesus  Christ,  as  expressed  in  the  above  texts, 
and  many  others  in  almost  every  part  of  the  New 
Testament. 

The  great  point  of  difference  has  been  respecting 
the  manner  in  which  Christ  was  the  author  of  salva- 
tion ;  and  the  very  circumstance  of  this  subject  hav- 
ing been  viewed  under  such  a  variety  of  aspects  is 
enough  to  prove,  that  it  is  a  thing  of  little  impor- 
tance as  an  article  of  christian  faith.     If  it  were  re- 

*  John  iii.  16  ;— Rom.  v,  1  ;— 1  John  v.  11  ;— Heb.  ix.  12;— Eph.  i.  7 


262  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  m. 

vealed,  it  would  admit  of  no  dispute ;  if  it  were  es- 
sential, it  would  have  been  revealed.  That  Christ 
was  a  Saviour  sent  from  God  is  a  revealed  truth,  and 
is  thus  an  essential  article  of  faith.  If  there  be  any 
secret  purpose,  or  mysterious  efficacy  in  his  doctrines 
and  actions,  they  have  not  been  made  known,  and 
therefore  it  is  not  a  necessary  part  of  a  christian's 
duty  to  search  them  out.  That  Christ  is  a  Redeem- 
er, and  a  Saviour,  with  full  power  from  heaven,  is 
enough  for  any  one  to  know,  who  opens  his  mind  to  a 
ready  reception  of  all  the  doctrines,  which  he  has 
plainly  taught,  and  who  is  determined  to  obey  the 
precepts,  and  comply  with  the  conditions  of  the  Gos- 
pel. 

But  the  busy  curiosity  of  men  has  not  been  satis- 
fied with  this  simplicity  of  faith.  To  believe  in 
mysteries  has  been  found  a  much  easier  task,  than  to 
do  justly,  love  mercy,  and  Avalk  humbly  ;  and  hence 
many  persons,  in  their  notion  of  redemption  through 
Christ,  have  indulged  in  fancies,  which  have  little  to 
do  with  the  love  of  God,  the  religion  of  the  heart, 
or  a  preparation  for  heaven.  As  a  doctrine  of  spe- 
culation, however,  it  is  fraught  with  no  evil,  when  it 
does  not  obscure  the  luminous  truths  of  the  Gospel, 
and  make  men  satisfied  with  a  false  faith  at  the  ex- 
pense of  a  holy  practice. 

Notwithstanding  that  the  mnnner  of  salvation 
through  Christ  is  not  revealed,  it  may  possibly  be  as- 
certained from  the  Scriptures.  The  Inquiry  is  harm- 
less, and  perhaps  a  profitable  one.  Certain  rules, 
however,  ought  to  be  instituted  at  the  outset,  and 


liKT.  viii.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  263 

rigidly  followed.  No  results  may  be  admitted, 
which  are  inconsistent  with  truths  plainly  revealed, 
or  with  the  attributes  of  God,  or  with  the  nature  of 
man,  or  with  the  commands  of  the  Scriptures.  Now 
the  calvinistic  notion  of  the  manner  of  salvation  has 
been  proved  to  be  at  variance  with  these  established 
principles.  It  destroys  the  attributes  of  the  Deity, 
demolishes  the  ground  work  of  piety,  is  not  adapted 
to  the  nature  and  condition  of  man,  and  renders  use- 
less every  Gospel  precept.  Unitarians  have  revolted 
at  the  thought  of  making  such  a  doctrine  a  part  of 
the  christian  religion.  They  have  understood  it  to 
be  a  sacred  principle,  that  God  will  not  accomplish 
any  purpose  in  a  manner^  which  shall  derogate  from 
his  moral  perfections,  or  render  nugatory  his  own 
commands  -,  and  they  have  never  dared  to  set  up  a 
doctrine  of  inference  in  pointed  opposition  to  nume- 
rous others,  which  harmonize  with  the  divine  attri- 
butes, and  are  laid  down  in  unambiguous  terms  as 
truths  of  revelation  and  rules  of  conduct. 

If  they  have  run  into  errors,  it  is  impossible  that 
these  should  have  any  very  injurious  tendency  ;  for 
in  their  opinions  upon  this  subject,  they  have  been 
extremely  cautious,  that  every  rule  of  morals  and 
piety,  every  motive  to  holiness  and  obedience,  should 
have  its  full  weight.  No  scheme  of  atonement  is  ad- 
missible with  them,  which  interferes  in  any  possible 
degree  with  the  practical  parts  of  the  Gospel.  This 
statement  of  facts  is  testimony  sufficient,  that  their 
views  of  atonement  are  at  least  Innocent  and  saluta- 
ry in  affording  encouragement  to  the  practical  duties. 


264  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [fart  ni. 

This  shall  be  made  further  to  appear  in  a  more  par- 
ticular examination. 

In  a  former  letter  it  was  stated,  that  the  opinions 
of  Unitarians,  respecting  the  influence  of  the  death 
of  Christ,  may  be  arranged  in  three  general  divisions. 
They  shall  be  thus  arranged  and  examined  in  the 
present  instance,  with  a  particular  regard  to  their 
moral  tendency. 

1.  The  death  of  Christ  is  considered  as  a  means 
by  which  the  pardon  of  sin  is  procured.  Some  do 
not  think  it  a  duty,  nor  a  proper  exercise,  to  inquire 
into  the  nature  and  operation  of  these  means,  as  they 
relate  to  the  Deity.  The  scheme  of  redemption  is 
of  divine  appointment.  God  chose  to  bestow  the 
gift  of  salvation  in  consequence  of  the  death  of 
Christ.  The  motives,  which  influenced  his  choice, 
make  no  part  of  the  doctrine.  That  he  could  not 
have  granted  salvation  in  any  other  way  is  not  affirm- 
ed ;  nor  is  it  supposed,  that  he  could  not  have  par- 
doned sinners  of  his  own  good  pleasure.  Such  a  sup- 
position would  be  setting  bounds  to  his  wisdom  and 
power.  It  is  only  understood,  that  in  the  system, 
which  God  actually  established  to  redeem  the  wick- 
ed from  iniquity,  the  death  of  Christ  was  essential, 
and  had  a  prevailing  influence,  although  Ave  are  un- 
acquainted with  its  precise  nature  and  extent.  Such 
is  the  opinion  of  many  Unitarians,  and  I  suppose  of 
nearly  all  Trinitarians  except  Calvinists.  Such  was 
the  opinion  of  Bishop  Butler,  although  he  seems  to 
have  entertained  some  notion  of  a  vicarious  suffer- 
ing, which  he  has  not  made  clear.     Speaking  of  the 


LET.  viir.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  265 

death  of  Christ,  he  observes,  "  How,  and  in  what 
particular  way,  it  had  this  efficacy,  there  are  not 
wanting  persons  who  have  endeavoured  to  explain ; 
but  I  do  not  find  that  the  Scripture  has  explained 
it."*  Dr.  Price  approves  the  opinion  of  Butler,  and 
Bishop  Magee  has  adopted  nearly  the  same.  It  is 
common  to  many  christians  of  all  denominations. 

You  will  hardly  discover  any  thing  here  injurious 
to  morals.  This  scheme,  it  is  true,  approaches  that 
of  the  Calvinists,  but  not  so  nearly  as  to  partake  of 
its  defects.  It  leaves  the  attributes  of  the  Deity  in 
their  full  perfection  and  exercise,  and  seeks  out  no 
method  of  salvation  in  Avhich  the  moral  agency  and 
absolute  obedience  of  man  are  not  necessary.  What- 
ever the  influence  of  the  death  of  Christ  may  have 
been,  it  had  no  part  in  satisfying  divine  justice,  in 
making  God  more  placable,  or  discharging  the  debt 
of  the  sinner ;  and  it  can  operate  only  in  favour  of 
those,  who  walk  in  the  footsteps  of  Christ,  attain 
purity  of  heart  and  life,  and  use  the  freedom  and 
privileges  they  enjoy,  to  the  glory  of  God. 

2.  A  second  view  embraces  the  reasons  why  God 
was  pleased  to  accept  the  sufferings  of  Christ,  as  an 
inducement  to  pardon  sinners.  The  foundation  of 
the  whole  is  believed  to  be  his  obedience  and  good- 
ness. The  merits  of  Christ's  death,  in  the  sight  of 
God,  consisted  in  his  having  conformed  in  all  things 
to  the  divine  will,  submitted  to  innumerable  trials  and 
sufferings  while  on  earth,  and  finally  resigned  himself 


^-  Butler's  Analogy,  Part  II.  Chap.  5. 

.34 


266  TRINITY  AND  AlONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

to  the  cruel  death  of  the  cross.  He  endured  the 
persecutions  of  men  with  unyielding  fortitude,  re- 
turned good  for  evil  to  all  his  enemies,  set  an  exam- 
ple of  perfect  holiness  to  the  world,  braved  every 
danger  in  establishing  the  truth  of  his  doctrines,  and, 
to  accomplish  his  work  of  obedience  and  righteous- 
ness, he  even  yielded  up  his  life. 

These  deeds  and  traits  of  character  were  so  rare, 
so  disinterested,  and  so  exalted  in  their  nature  and  in- 
fluence, that  God  was  graciously  pleased  to  reward 
him  with  the  privilege  and  power  of  making  his  in- 
tercessions efficacious  to  the  pardon  of  sinners.  He 
has  accordingly  been  constituted  our  advocate  with 
the  Father,  our  intercessor,  whose  obedience  and 
death  have  given  him  free  access  to  the  throne  of 
grace,  and  rendered  his  intreaties  in  our  behalf  availa- 
ble to  our  forgiveness  and  salvation.  "  We  are  saved, 
and  ransomed,  and  pardoned,"  says  Emlyn,  "  by  his 
blood,  as  that  was  the  highest  instance  of  consum- 
mate '  obedience  even  to  the  death  of  the  cross ;' 
with  which  the  holy  God  was  so  pleased,  that  he  ex- 
alted him  to  his  right  hand,  and  constituted  him  the 
only  advocate,  through  whose  mediation  he  would 
grant  pardon  and  other  favours  to  repenting  sinners. 
His  pardon  is  free  in  respect  of  any  strict  merit ; 
therefore  it  is  for  '  his  own  sake  ;'  but  in  respect  of 
the  mediation  interposed,  it  is  '  for  Christ's  sake'  al- 
so. So  that  pardon  is  immediately  obtained  by 
Christ's  intercession."*     Here  we  have  an  account  of 

*  Emlyn's  Works,  Vol.  ii.  p.  102. 


LET.  vm.J  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  267 

the  manner  of  salvation  through  Jesus  Christ.  His 
obedience  is  the  first  and  principal  step.  As  a  re- 
ward for  this,  he  has  received  power  to  obtain  the 
pardon  and  salvation  of  the  penitent,  who  forsake 
their  sins,  and  become  his  worthy  followers.* 

Others  have  similar  views,  except  that  they  be- 
lieve the  obedience  and  righteousness  of  Christ  to  be 
of  themselves  immediately  available  with  the  Deity 
to  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  Although  Christ  has 
been  exalted  to  the  right  hand  of  the  Father,  as  tes- 
tified in  the  Scriptures,  and  although  his  intercessions 
may  be  necessary  to  the  prosperity  of  his  church, 
and  to  the  accomplishment  of  the  great  purposes  of 
his  dispensation,  jet  what  he  has  already  done  issuf- 

*  This  mode  of  explaining  the  efficacy  of  the  death  of  Christ  was  also 
approved  by  Dr.  Benson.  In  his  Notes  on  1  John  ii.  2,  is  contained  the  fol- 
lowing paragraph,  apparently  quoted  from  some  other  writer,  but  without  any 
reference. 

"  Jesus  Christ,  as  a  reward  for  his  perfect  obedience  and  willing  suffering 
and  death,  has  received  of  his  Father  all  power,  in  heaven  and  earth  ;  and 
among  other  things,  power  to  recall  wandering  siiuiers  into  the  ways  of  holi- 
ness, with  an  assurance  of  pardon  and  acceptance  from  God.  And,  upon  this 
reconciling  them  to  God,  he  expiates  their  sins.  For,  having  rendered  them 
meet  objects  of  divine  favour,  he  then  gives  them  the  strongest  assurances,  that 
God  will  be  propitious  or  merciful  unto  them.  And  Christ  will  himself  be  final- 
ly honoured,  by  bestowing  upon  them  the  blessings  promised  to  sincere  penitents, 
namely,  deliverance  from  death  and  misery,  and  a  glorious  resurrection  to 
endless  life  and  complete  felicity.  In  this  method  are  true  penitents  assured 
of  pardon  from  God,  through  Jesus  Christ,  or  cleansed  from  all  sins."  A'ce 
Benson's  Paraphrase  and  JYotes,  2nd  edit,  vol,  ii.  p.  523. 

Many  of  the  early  Socinians  entertained  similar  views,  as  appears  in  a  quo- 
tation from  Wissowatius  in  a  former  letter.  That  this  opinion  was  universal, 
is  perhaps  doubtful,  as  it  is  not  insisted  on  by  Crellius  in  his  admirable  reply 
to  Grotius.  Responsio  ad  Librum  Hugonis  Grolii,  quern  de  Salisfactione 
Christi,  adversus  Fauslum  Socinum  Senensem  scripsit.  But  in  this  learned 
treatise,  Crellius  confines  himself  chiefly  to  what  is  clearly  expressed  in  the 
Scriptures,  and  to  the  arguments  of  his  opponent.      Vid.  Frat.  Polon.  vol.iii.. 


268  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  Lp^^t  ih. 

ficient  to  enlist  the  divine  mercy  in  behalf  of  sinners, 
and  to  ensure  their  forgiveness.  Many  instances  are 
recorded  in  holy  writ,  which  show  that  God  has  re- 
warded the  prayers  and  pious  services  of  certain  per- 
sons, by  conferring  favours  and  blessings  on  others. 
From  analogy  it  may  be  inferred,  that  without  any 
inconsistency  with  the  order  of  providence  or  sense 
of  Scripture,  the  same  thing  might  take  place  in  re- 
gard to  Christ,  whose  piety  and  goodness  were  so 
eminent. 

But  these  minor  ditTerences  are  of  little  impor- 
tance, since  they  all  look  to  the  obedience  and  holy 
practice  of  Christ  as  the  efficacious  ground  of  par- 
don. The  question  is,  whether  this  mode  of  viewing 
the  subject  throws  any  obstacles  in  the  way  of  piety 
and  morals ;  Is  it  a  discouragement  to  obedience  and 
a  good  life  to  believe,  that  by  these  Christ  has  ren- 
dered a  most  acceptable  service  to  God ;  and  that 
without  these  no  man  can  hope  for  the  salvation 
thus  purchased  for  penitent  transgressors  ?  Is  not  the 
contrary  true  ?  Will  not  men  be  more  hkely  to  imi- 
tate the  example  of  Christ,  when  they  feel  assur- 
ed, that  his  virtues,his  deeds  of  goodness  and  love,  his 
generous  sacrifices,  his  humble  submission,  and  ardent 
piety,  were  the  available  means  by  which  God  was 
pleased  to  accept  him  as  a  Saviour,  and  to  pardon  and 
bless  a  wicked  world  ?    This  will  not  be  denied. 

John  Taylor  has  some  excellent  remarks  bearing 
on  this  point,  the  appropriateness  of  which  is  a  suf- 
ficient apology  for  quoting  them  at  large.  "The 
love  and  obedience  of  Christ,"  says  he,  "will  appear  a 


i,ET.  VIII.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  269 

very  just  foundation  of  the  divine  grace,  and  the  most 
proper  expedient  to  communicate  it,  and  our  redemp- 
tion by  Christ  will  stand  in  a  just,  clear,  and  beautiful 
light,  if  we  duly  consider,  that  truth,  virtue,  righteous- 
ness, being  useful,  and  doing  good,  or  which  is  the  same 
thing,  obedience  to  God,  is  the  chief  perfection  of  the 
intellectual  nature.  Intelligent  beings  are  of  all  others 
the  most  excellent ;  and  the  right  use  of  the  power 
of  intelligence  is  the  very  highest  glory  and  excel- 
lence of  intelligent  beings.  Consequently,  righteous- 
ness, goodness,  and  obedience,  must  be  of  the  highest 
esteem  and  value  with  the  Father  of  the  universe,  a 
most  pure  and  perfect  Spirit ;  the  only  power,  if  I 
may  so  say,  that  can  prevail  with  him,  and  the  only 
acceptable  price  for  purchasing  any  favours  or  bles- 
sings at  his  hands.  And  it  must  be  the  most  sublime 
and  perfect  display  of  his  wisdom  and  goodness  to 
devise  methods,  and  erect  schemes  for  promoting 
righteousness,  virtue,  goodness,  and  obedience,  be- 
cause this  is  the  most  effectual  way  of  promoting  the 
truest  excellency,  honour,  and  happiness  of  his  ra- 
tional creatures.  For  which  reason,  he  cannot  in 
any  other  way  exercise  his  perfections  among  the 
works  of  his  hands  more  nobly  and  worthily."* 

This  argument  is  rational,  scriptural,  and  forcible. 
Place  the  subject  in  what  position  you  will,  and  it 
must   nevertheless  be  true  at  last,  that  a  doctrine, 


*  Taylor's  Key  to  the  Apostolic  Writings,  chap.  viii.  }  151.  "  Tliis  work,-' 
says  Bishop  Watson,  "  is  greatly  admired  by  the  learned,  as  containing  the 
best  Introduction  to  the  Epistles,  and  the  clearest  account  of  the  whole  Cos 
pel  scheme,  which  was  ever  written."     Tracts,  vol.  Hi. 


i70  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

which  assigns  the  highest  rewards  of  heaven  to  the 
exercise  of  righteousness  and  a  cultivation  of  the 
moral  powers,  will  be  eminently  fitted  to  encourage 
good  morals,  and  quicken  the  pious  aifections.  This 
will  hold  true  of  the  above  opinion  respecting  the 
way  of  salvation  through  Christ,  whether  that  opi- 
nionbe  an  accurate  deduction  from  the  sense  of  Scrip- 
ture or  not.  So  far  from  invalidating,  it  helps  to  en- 
force every  moral  precept,  not  only  by  insisting  on  a 
holy  life  as  a  necessary  preparation  for  enjoying  the 
benefits  of  Christ's  death,  but  by  maintaining  that 
the  power  of  conferring  these  benefits  has  been 
granted  on  the  same  consideration. 

3.  A  third  opinion  is  that,  which  regards  the  agen- 
cy of  Christ  in  the  salvation  of  sinners  as  operating  on 
men  alone,  and  not  on  God.  The  calvinistic  scheme 
inculcates  the  notion,  that  the  determinations  of  God 
were  influenced,  the  rigour  of  his  justice  remitted, 
and  his  mercy  called  into  action,  by  the  sufferings  and 
death  of  Christ.  This  same  doctrine  teaches,  that 
God  was  thus  reconciled  to  his  rebellious  children, 
and  induced  to  receive  them  into  favour;  whereas, 
the  uniform  declaration  of  Scripture  is,  that  God 
"  has  reconciled  us  to  himself  by  Jesus  Christ,"  and 
that  "  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  unto 
himself."*  This  is  consistent  with  the  character  of  the 
Supreme  Being.  He  is  unchangeable,  and  never  was 
at  variance  with  his  creatures.  The  wicked  have 
broken  his  laws,  and  by  this  reason  are  subject  to  the 

*2  Cor.  V.  18,  19. 


i,ET.  vni.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  271 

penalty  of  disobedience  ;  nor  can  they  ever  be  re- 
conciled to  his  good  government,  till  their  minds  are 
renewed,  their  sins  forsaken,  and  their  characters 
changed.  When  this  is  done,  a  reconciliation  will  be 
brought  about,  not  on  the  part  of  God,  but  of  men. 
To  produce  this  reconciliation,^hat  is,  to  suppress  all 
opposition  to  the  wise  and  righteous  laws  of  God, 
was  the  grand  object  of  the  Saviour's  mission  into 
the  world. 

God  is  the  author  of  the  whole  ;  and  every  thing 
in  the  economy  of  redemption  is  to  be  traced  to  his 
love^  and  not  to  wrath  or  vindictiveness,  for  no  such 
emotions  can  exist  in  the  divine  nature.  Not  a  more 
imposing  truth  presents  itself  in  the  whole  tenour  of 
Scripture,  and  the  whole  moral  work  of  creation, 
than  that  "  God  is  love."  The  very  reason  why  he 
sent  his  Son  to  be  a  Redeemer  and  a  Saviour  is  de- 
clared to  be,  that  he  loved  the  world.  The  well  be- 
ing and  happiness  of  his  creatures  contribute  as  much 
to  his  glory,  as  the  beauty,  order,  and  perfection  of 
his  works.  In  what  can  a  holy  God  delight  more, 
than  in  beholding  the  creatures,  whom  he  has  formed 
with  high  and  varied  powers,  enjoying  the  felicity, 
which  results  from  the  noblest  exercise  of  these  di- 
vine gifts,  and  which  exhibits  in  a  brilliant  light  the 
power,  wisdom,  and  benignity  of  their  author  ? 

When  they  have  unwisely  forsaken  his  counsels, 
and  brought  misery  upon  themselves,  it  does  not  ex- 
cite anger  m  their  heavenly  Father,  but  compassion 
and  mercy.  Evil  and  misery  are  defects  in  his  mo- 
ral creation,  which  a  regard  for  his  own  glory,  and 


272  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  in. 

for  the  perfection  of  his  works,  prompts  him  to  re- 
move. But  to  the  wicked  he  cannot  communicate 
the  fehcity  of  the  blessed,  till  they  cease  from  their 
wickedness.  When  they  are  changed,  created  anew, 
reconciled  to  God  in  hohness,  turned  from  darkness 
to  hght,  from  the  bondage  of  iniquity  to  the  freedom 
of  truth  and  righteousness,  then  God  can  bless  them 
with  spiritual  gifts,  and  make  them  partakers  of  the 
rich  treasures  of  his  goodness.  Jesus  came  to  work 
this  change,  and  put  men  in  a  condition  in  which  they 
might  receive  the  rewards,  and  enjoy  the  blessings, 
bestowed  on  those  only,  who  are  free  from  sin. 

Now,  as  before  observed,  no  person  can  be  placed 
in  this  condition  till  he  is  released  from  his  moral  im- 
perfections, whether  these  have  arisen  from  the 
frailty  of  his  nature,  neglect  of  duty,  or  wilful  trans- 
gression. Here  we  perceive  the  necessity  of  the 
pardoning  mercy  of  God.  But  the  Scriptures  testi- 
fy, that  God  pardons  us  freely^  which  could  not  be 
true,  if  he  were  influenced  by  any  thing  in  the  nature 
of  an  equivalent  for  sin,  a  price,  or  the  payment  of  a 
debt.  Salvation  is  a  free  gift  of  God's  love  and  fa- 
vour, or,  as  the  Apostle  expresses  it,  we  are  "justified 
freely  by  his  grace,  through  the  redemption  that  is  in 
Christ  Jesus."*  And  it  is  the  sense  of  all  Scripture, 
that  God  pardons  us  freely^  when  we  are  reconciled 
to  him.  He  could  not  pardon  us  before,  without  vi- 
olating the  rectitude  of  his  own  laws :  and  if  hq 
could,  we  should  have  no   ability  to  enjoy  the  bles- 


r,ET.  vni.J  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  273 

sings  of  salvation,  while  in  a  state  of  wickedness  and 
rebellion. 

Here  again  we  discover  the  compassion  and  good- 
ness of  God,  in  making  known  the  terms  of  pardon, 
or  rather  the  condition  in  which  pardon  can  be  of 
any  service  to  us  ;  and  also  in  sending  Jesus  Christ 
to  afford  us  every  possible  aid  and  inducement  to  ac- 
cept these  terms.  Repentance  and  obedience  are 
the  conditions,  and  the  sole  conditions,  on  which  God 
has  professed  a  willingness  to  accept  sinners.  His 
language  is,  "  Let  the  wicked  forsake  his  way,  and 
the  unrighteous  man  his  thoughts,  and  let  him  return 
unto  the  Lord,  and  he  will  have  mercy  upon  him,  and 
to  our  God,  for  he  will  abundantly  pardon."*  Here 
the  promise  of  pardon  is  extended  to  such  as  forsake 
their  sins.  The  prophets  preached  repentance^  John 
the  Baptist  preached  repentance,  so  did  the  Saviour, 
and  so  did  the  Apostles.  It  is,  indeed,  impressed  up- 
on us  throughout  the  sacred  oracles,  as  a  truth  never 
to  be  overlooked,  that  God  will  freely  forgive  those, 
and  those  only,  who  sincerely  repent,  who  forsake 
their  sins,  and  walk  in  the  ways  of  holiness.  He  asks 
nothing  more  ;  he  demands  only  what  the  sinner  can 
render ;  his  sovereign  mercy  will  supply  the  defi- 
ciency. Pardon  is  not  promised  through  Christ  to 
the  incorrigible  sinner;  but  when,  in  consequence  of 
what  Christ  has  done,  men  become  holy  in  faith  and 
practice,  their  past  sins  will  then  be  no  longer  impu- 

*  Isaiah,  Iv.  7. 

35 


274  TlimiTY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  in. 

ted  to  them,  but  will  be  blotted  out  by  the  special 
favour  of  God,  according  to  his  promise. 

By  these  reflections  we  are  conducted  to  a  distinct 
understanding  of  the  agency  of  Christ  in  the  redemp- 
tion and  salvation  of  sinners.  He  has  been  an  instru- 
ment in  reconciling  transgressors  to  their  Maker,  and 
thus  causing  them  to  accept  the  conditions  on  which 
God  has  signified  his  readiness  to  pardon  the  guilty. 
The  whole  has  consisted  in  turning  them  from  ignor- 
ance to  knowledge,  from  evil  to  good,  from  blindness 
of  mind,  and  hardness  of  heart,  to  a  love  of  God  and 
reverence  of  his  glorious  attributes,  from  the  degrad- 
ing thraldom  of  sin  to  the  heavenly  attainments  of  a 
pure  religion,  and  the  joyful  hopes  of  an  immortal 
felicity.  Christ  has  been  instrumental  in  the  salva- 
tion of  sinners  by  conquering  the  power  of  evil  in 
the  human  heart,  and  subduing  the  spirit  of  opposi- 
tion to  the  divine  Avill. 

This  purpose  he  has  accomplished  in  various  ways. 
Every  thing  done  by  him  which  has  a  tendency  to  re- 
concile men  to  God,  constitutes  a  part  of  his  great 
work.  His  instructions,  his  preaching,  his  wonderful 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  his  appropriate  and  beautiful 
parables,  his  advice,  counsel,  warnings,  thrcatenings, 
promises,  have  their  respective  important  eflects. 
His  miracles  repeatedly  performed  to  prove,  that  he 
was  the  Son  of  God  in  a  high  and  peculiar  sense, 
and  that  he  acted  by  the  aid,  and  guidance,  and  pow- 
er of  his  Father  and  our  Father,  these  hold  a  distin- 
guished place  in  the  work  of  redemption  through 
Christ,  by  convincing  men  of  the  truth  of  his  doc- 
trines, and  strengthening  their  confidence  in  the  di- 


juKT.  viir.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  275 

vlnity  of  his  character.  The  holy  and  perfect  ex- 
ample of  Christ,  his  piety  and  humble  submission  to 
God,  his  deeds  of  goodness  and  love,  his  disinterested 
and  unceasing  benevolence,  his  patience  in  adversity 
and  fortitude  under  every  trial,  his  invariable  upright- 
ness of  conduct  and  excellence  of  temper,  all  these 
are  so  many  incitements  to  repentance  and  a  good 
life. 

The  same  may  be  said  of  h\s  doctrines,  the  charac- 
ter which  he  exhibits  of  the  Supreme  being,  the  re- 
quisitions of  the  law  and  the  effects  of  divine  mercy, 
the  terms  of  pardon,  and  especially  the  great  doc- 
trine of  a  future  state  of  retribution,  the  accountable- 
ness  of  man  for  all  his  actions,  and  the  certainty  that 
every  one  will  hereafter  be  judged,  and  rewarded  or 
punished  according  to  the  use  he  makes  of  his  present 
endowments  and  privileges.  And  lastly,  the  suffer- 
ings of  Christ  during  his  whole  life,  and  especially  at 
the  time  of  his  condemnation  by  his  murderous  per- 
secutors, his  death  under  the  most  aggravating  and 
cruel  circumstances,  his  triumphant  resurrection,  his 
appearance  to  his  disciples  afterwards,  and,  to  crown 
the  whole,  his  glorious  ascension  to  heaven  in  the 
presence  of  many  witnesses ;  these  were  events  of 
the  greatest  moment  in  giving  power  to  his  religion, 
converting  sinners  to  faith  in  its  doctrines  and  a  know- 
ledge and  practice  of  its  precepts,  and  thus  redeem- 
ing them  from  iniquity,  and  procuring  the  salvation  of 
their  souls,  by  making  them  fit  subjects  for  the  par- 
doning mercy  of  God. 

Hence,  redemption  throngli  Christ  is  not  a  con^e 


276  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [part  hi. 

quence  oi  his  death  alone,  nor  of  any  one  single  act, 
but  of  all  he  did,  taught,  and  suffered  during  his  min- 
istry on  earth,  in  connexion  with  the  part  he  may 
still  be  acting  in  his  exalted  station.  It  has  been  truly 
observed  by  Henry  Taylor  and  others,  that  the 
Scriptures  do  not  speak  of  our  salvation  by  the  death 
of  Christ  alone.  We  are  there  said  to  be  "  saved  by 
faith,  by  works,  by  the  word  of  God,  by  baptism,  by 
grace,"  and  by  many  other  things,  as  well  as  by  the 
death  of  Christ,  yet  no  one  supposes,  that  we  can  be 
saved  by  either  of  these  singly,  but  by  all  combined. 

Tillotson  has  well  described  the  offices  of  Christ 
in  procuring  salvation.  "  By  all  he  did  and  suffered 
for  us  in  the  days  of  his  flesh,  and  in  the  state  of  his 
humiliation,  and  by  all  that  he  still  continues  to  do 
for  us,  now  that  he  is  in  heaven  at  the  right  hand  of 
God,  he  hath  effected  and  brought  about  the  great 
work  of  salvation.  His  doctrine  and  his  life,  his 
death  and  sufferings,  his  resurrection  from  the  dead, 
and  his  powerful  intercession  for  us  at  the  right  hand 
of  God,  have  all  a  great  influence  in  reforming  and 
saving  mankind  ;  and  by  all  these  ways  and  means  he 
is  the  author  and  cause  of  our  salvation."*  Thus  Je- 
sus redeems  men,  or  takes  away  their  sins,  by  all  his 
actions  and  doctrines  together,  and  by  the  power  and 
influence  of  his  religion  to  reform  the    wicked,  re- 


*  Tillotson's  Works,  vol.  vii.  p.  2069. 

The  opinion  of  Tillotson  on  the  ntKiiK'niciii  s^immhs  to  have  resembled  those  ol 
Butler,  Piice,  and  Magee  ;  yet,  perhaps,  he  spnaks)  more  explicitly  than  they 
have  done  respecting  the  death  of  Christ  as  in  sonic  way  aftecting  divine  jii.s- 
tice.  Sep  his  Sermon  entitled,  Christ  /fif^'hithnr,  and  Obedienrr  (hr.  Covditinv 
f>f  Salvafion. 


LKT.  vm.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  277 

generate  their  depraved  hearts,  and  convert  them  to 
hoHness  of  life  and  temper. 

Such  is  the  view  of  many  christians  concerning 
the  mode  of  salvation  through  Christ.  And  now  it 
may  be  permitted  to  inquire,  what  its  natural  tenden- 
cy ought  to  be  on  practical  morals  and  religion  ?  Does 
it  encourage  men  to  harbour  a  single  evil  thought, 
purpose,  or  desire ;  to  neglect  a  single  duty  of  piety 
or  charity?  Does  it  hold  out  any  substitute  for  per- 
sonal holiness,  or  any  incitements  to  the  vicious  pro- 
pensities ?  Does  it  conceal  the  odiousness  of  sin  and 
its  dreadful  consequences,  or  relax  the  obligations  of 
moral  duty,  or  weaken  the  sense  of  accountableness 
to  God  for  every  thought  and  action  ?  Does  it  de- 
grade the  majesty  of  the  law,  or  enfeeble  the  au- 
thority of  the  divine  commands,  or  lessen  the  cer- 
tainty of  a  future  judgment  and  righteous  retribu- 
tion ? 

Not  one  of  these  questions  can  be  answered  in  the 
affirmative.  The  view  above  described  has  not  even 
this  negative  tendency;  and  in  truth,  it  is  remarka- 
ble for  nothing  more,  than  its  positive  moral  and  re- 
ligious bearing ;  that  is,  if  you  will  allow  morals  and 
religion  to  consist  in  good  practice.  It  finds  no  effi- 
cacy in  any  scheme  of  redemption,  nor  any  hope  for 
the  sinner,  without  repentance  and  obedience,  de- 
vout submission  to  the  will  of  God,  and  profoimd  re- 
verence of  his  holy  character.  Nor  does  it  take  re- 
pentance for  an  empty  name,  nor  look  for  its  value 
alone  in  emotions  of  sorrow,  and  remorse  of  con- 
science for   past  guilt.      To  repent  is  to  reform,  to 


27B  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  [I'akt  iii. 

forsake  sin,  to  do  good  where  evil  has  been  done  be- 
fore. It  is  to  make  our  faith  a  purifying  principle, 
to  amend  the  heart,  subdue  the  passions,  banish  evil 
desires,  to  love  where  we  have  hated,  and  to  return 
kindness  for  injury.  To  repent  is  to  examine  and 
watch  our  own  hearts,  love  God  supremely,  and  our 
neighbour  as  ourselves.  Whoever  sincerely  obeys, 
will  sincerely  repent.  Obedience  ensures  repentance. 
The  latter  is  turning  from  evil,  the  former  is  doing 
good;  the  one  inspires  respect  for  the  divine  laws, 
the  other  applies  them  to  practice.  Both  are  abso- 
lutely essential  to  salvation  through  Clirist. 

Can  that  opinion,  which  regards  a  good  life  as  the 
foundation  and  means  of  final  acceptance  with  God, 
and  of  eternal  felicity,  can  such  an  opinion  be  charged 
with  having  an  unfavourable  influence  on  morals  ? 
The  charge  is  equally  absurd  and  ill  founded  and  de- 
mands no  refutation.  It  is  enough  to  have  stated 
facts  ;  the  conclusion  is  self  evident. 

Nor  is  it  a  just  inference,  which  some  have  drawn, 
that  this  view  unduly  exalts  human  merit.  The  truth 
is,  that  in  relation  to  God,  no  merit  on  the  part  of 
man  is  supposed.  The  whole  is  of  divine  mercy,  it 
is  the  exclusive  work  of  God,  the  merit  is  his,  and  to 
him  belongs  all  the  praise.  By  his  compassion  alone 
he  was  inclined  to  save  and  bless  his  creatures ;  he 
sent  his  Son  to  redeem  them  from  their  sins  by  pub- 
lishing the  conditions  of  pardon,  and  performing 
works  to  aid  their  restoration  to  holiness,  which  could 
not  have  been  performed  without  light,  guidance, 
and  support  from  heaven.     The  actions  of  men  have 


LIT.  VIII.]  TRINITY  AND  ATONEMENT.  279 

no  merit,  except  as  the  testimony  of  obedience. 
They  are  of  no  value  as  a  price  of  salvation.  God 
SB.yes  freely.  Every  act  of  obedience  is  an  act  of  du- 
ty, and  is  so  far  meritorious,  as  to  deserve  the  pro- 
mised reward,  because  God  has  promised  it,  and  not 
because  any  benefit  is  conferred  on  him.  As  far  as 
there  is  any  merit  in  complying  with  the  conditions 
of  divine  forgiveness,  so  far  is  human  merit  exalted 
by  the  above  views  of  the  manner  of  salvation,  and 
no  farther. 

Finally,  the  comparative  moral  tendency  of  the 
Calvinistic  and  Unitarian  schemes  of  atonement,  may 
be  expressed  in  a  few  words.  Calvinists  ascribe  sal- 
vation to  a  cause,  which  puts  all  human  agency  out 
of  the  question,  renders  personal  holiness  unnecessa- 
ry, and  personal  responsibility  impossible.  Unitarians, 
on  the  contrary,  refer  the  original  cause  of  salvation 
to  the  mercy  of  God,  and  dare  not  indulge  any  hope 
of  immortal  glory,  which  does  not  rest  on  a  faithful 
obedience  of  the  divine  laws,  as  revealed  and  con- 
firmed by  Jesus  Christ.  Calvinists  inculcate  morals, 
it  is  true,  but  they  have  found  out  a  way  of  salva- 
tion, which  does  not  require  good  morals,  or  rather 
in  which  they  can  be  of  no  service.  The  principles 
of  Unitarians,  more  rigid  and  consistent,  demand  per- 
fect obedience,  without  any  such  discouragement  to 
virtuous  and  holy  living.  Calvinists,  to  be  religious, 
must  believe  one  thing  and  practise  another;  with 
Unitarians,  faith  and  practical  religion  are  in  harmony. 


PART  IV. 


COMPARATIVE  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF 
THE  LEADING  DOCTRINES  OF  CALVI- 
NISM AND  THE  SENTIMENTS  OF  UNI- 
TARIANS. 


LETTER  I. 

Calvinistic  and  Unitarian  Views  of  the  Depravity  of 

Man. 

SIR, 

T  ▼  E  come  now  to  a  consideration  of  the  more 
peculiar  doctrines  of  Calvinism ;  or  those  doctrines 
Avhich  owe  their  origin  to  the  metaphysics  of  Austin, 
their  growth  and  strength  to  the  genius  of  Calvin, 
and  their  maturity  to  the  deliberations  at  the  Synod 
of  Dort.  They  may  be  arranged  in  the  folloAving 
order,  namely,  total  depravity^  irresistible  grace,  di- 
vine decrees,  particular  redemption,  and  Jinal  perseve- 
rance. These  are  the  five  links  in  the  Calvinistic 
chain,  and  so  closely  depending  on  each  other,  that, 
should  one  be  broken,  all  the  rest  must  fall.  Ac- 
cording to  Calvinists,  this  chain  constitutes  the  entire 
system  of  Christianity ;  it  comprises  faith,  charity 
36 


282  MORAL  TEi\DE]\CY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

virtue,  piety;  it  embraces  the  whole  compass  of  the 
divine  dispensations  to  the  moral  creation,  and  points 
out  the  only  possible  method  by  which  the  Maker 
of  the  universe  could  bless  any  portion  of  his  crea- 
tures with  salvation  and  eternal  life. 

Some  of  these  doctrines  you  enumerate,  and  you 
profess  to  account  it  an  evidence  of  the  immorality 
of  Unitarians,  that  they  do  not  believe  and  preach 
them.  Whether  this  be  a  just  conclusion  we  arc 
now  to  examine. 

It  is  but  fair  to  premise,  that  you  acknowledge 
some  friends  among  Unitarians,  whom  you  esteem, 
and  who  "  set  an  example  of  integrity,  benevolence, 
and  active  virtue."  But  lest  it  should  bethought  that 
you  allow  even  these  to  have  the  virtues  of  Chris- 
tians, you  immediately  ask,  "  may  not  the  same  be 
said  of  many  Deists,  from  Lord  Herbert  down  to  the 
present  day  ?"  Whether  your  unitarian  friends  will 
take  this  as  a  compliment  or  not,  this  is  no  place  to 
inquire.  If  it  has  been  your  ill  fortune,  however,  to 
find  none  among  them,  who  showed  from  their  pro- 
fessions, lives,  and  conversation,  that  they  acted  from 
higher  motives  than  those  of  deism,  I  must  think 
your  acquaintance  has  been  extremely  limited,  and 
must  lament,  that  you  should  feel  warranted  from 
information  so  slender,  in  denying  the  christian  name 
to  a  whole  denomination  of  professed  Christians. 
Every  sincere  unitarian  must  hope,  that  those  who 
dilFer  from  him  in  faith,  will  hereafter  be  more  for- 
tunate than  you  have  been,  in  the  friendships  they 
may  form,  and  the  acquaintances  they  may  contract, 
with  his  brethren.     I  am  willing  to  grant,  however, 


LET.  I.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  283 

in  passing,  that  so  far  as  you  have  testified,  that  the 
Unitarians,  who,  most  unluckily  for  their  brethren, 
have  enjoyed  your  friendship,  are  without  christian 
morals,  you  have  proved  the  fact  of  your  charges. 
But  your  premises  are  too  narrow  for  your  conclu- 
sions. If  you  had  said,  that  all  Unitarians,  whom 
you  ever  knew,  were  no  better  than  deists  in  prin- 
ciples and  practice,  the  subject  would  stand  on  a  very 
diiTerent  footing.  It  would  be  an  affair  exclusively 
between  you,  and  your  private  unitarian  friends.  But 
now  it  comes  in  another,  arjd  a  vastly  more  important 
shape.  You  embrace  Unitarians  "  all  over  the 
world,"  and  consequently  all  must  feel  themselves 
implicated  in  your  charges. 

After  some  preliminary  remarks  you  go  on  to 
speak  as  follows. 

"  The  Unitarian  mode  of  preaching  is  more  ac- 
ceptable to  the  taste  of  carnal,  worldly  men,  than 
any  other  kind  of  preaching.  And  can  any  one,  who 
reflects  a  moment,  or  who  has  eyes  to  see,  and  ears 
to  hear,  doubt  that  this  is  the  fact?  All  unitarian 
preachers,  that  I  ever  heard  of,  teach  their  hearers, 
that,  human  nature  is  not  so  depraved,  as  calvinists 
believe  ;  that  regeneration  is  unnecessary  ;  that  the 
various  exercises  of  mind,  supposed  by  many  to  be 
essential  to  piety,  are  mere  dreams  of  enthusiasm  ; 
that  the  strictness  and  seclusion  from  fashionable 
amusements,  such  as  the  theatre,  the  ball  room,  and 
the  card  table,  which  some  inculcate,  are  uncom- 
manded  austerities,  and  being  '  righteous  over  much,' 
and  that  all  men,  whatever  may  be  their  character, 
will  finally  be  saved,  or  annihilated.'' 


284  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

This  you  state  as  a  "  fair  specimen  of  the  doctrine 
inculcated  by  unitarian  preachers  all  over  the  world^''^ 
and  then  infer,  that  those,  who  can  preach  thus,  and 
approve  such  preaching,  must  necessarily  be  among 
the  more  immoral   part  of  the  community. 

It  cannot  escape  observation,  that  you  profess  to 
build  this  description  of  unitarian  preaching  upon 
hearsay.  You  produce  no  authority  to  confirm  your 
statement,  nor  do  you  pretend  to  derive  your  know- 
ledge from  personal  observation,  or  enlarged  inquiry. 
But  admitting  you  sincerely  believe  your  impressions 
to  be  correct,  which  I  certainly  do  not  doubt,  are 
you  willing  to  take  upon  yourself  the  responsibility 
of  bringing  reproach  and  censure  on  the  whole 
body  of  Unitarians,  with  nothing  better  to  sustain 
you,  than  idle  rumour,  and  the  poisoned  breath  of 
evil  report  ?  Nay  more,  suppose  you  can  make  it 
appear,  that  some  individual  among  them  has  actu- 
ally been  known  to  preach  exactly  in  the  manner 
you  describe,  do  you  think  it  fair  to  judge  them  all 
by  this  example  ?  Is  there  a  single  sect  in  Chris- 
tendom, who  would  think  themselves  Avell  used  to 
be  judged  as  a  body  by  the  opinions,  preaching,  and 
conduct  qf  some  one,  two,  or  half  a  dozen  prominent 
men,  who  might  be  selected  from  among  them  ? 
Would  you  think  it  just,  or  honourable,  in  a  Unita- 
rian to  judge  Presbyterians  in  this  way?  And  es- 
pecially, would  you  think  it  just,  or  honourable,  or 
christian-likc  in  hun,  if  he  had  never  listened  to  the 
preaching  of  Presbyterians,  and  relied  on  what  he 
had  heard  for  his  knowledge,  to   charge  them  as  a 


LET,  I.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OP  CALVINISM.  285 

sect  with  preaching  to  please  the  immoral  and  licen- 
tious ?  This  is  a  fair  test,  and  one  which  you  can 
apply  to  your  own  conscience  and  sense  of  propriety. 

All  Unitarians  sincerely  believe,  that  the  peculiar 
doctrines  of  Calvinism,  if  allowed  to  have  their  full 
effect  on  the  mind  and  principles,  are  of  the  most 
immoral  tendency.  They  consequently  believe,  that 
preaching  these  doctrines  will  have,  and  does  have, 
a  bad  influence  on  society.  But  Avould  you  think 
them  justified  by  this  belief  in  maintaining  that  all 
persons,  who  are  fond  of  hearing  these  doctrines 
preached,  thereby  give  unusual  tokens  of  the  de- 
pravity of  their  hearts,  and  looseness  of  their  lives  ? 
It  is  presumed  you  would  not.  Why  then  judge 
others  upon  principles,  which  no  man  is  willing  to 
have  applied  to  himself?  Unitarians  believe  it  pos- 
sible for  Calvinists  to  be  good  people  and  good  chris- 
tians, even  in  defiance  of  their  principles.  Conscience, 
reason,  common  sense,  and  the  plain  practical  parts 
of  scripture  have  a  stronger  power,  for  the  most 
part,  than  the  dark  dogmas  of  theologists  ;  and  how- 
ever the  latter  may  pervert  the  former,  it  is  no  easy 
thing  for  them  to  assume  an  entire  ascendancy. 

For  this  reason.  Unitarians  do  not  call  Calvinists 
deists,  when  they  find  them  departing,  as  they  think, 
most  deplorably  from  the  true  faith  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, or  showing  in  their  conduct  little  respect  for 
their  principles.  We  consider  them  christians,  not  for 
their  virtues  alone,  nor  their  distinctive  tenets,  but 
because  they  believe  in  Jesus  Christ  as  their  Saviour, 
and  profess  to  be  guided  by  his  Gospel.     Nor  do  we 


286  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  ^part  iv. 

think  we  ought  to  deny  them  the  christian  name,  be- 
cause, in  addition  to  the  essential  articles  of  faith, 
they  hold  to  many  errors  dangerous  to  morals,  and 
holy  living.  Nor,  because  we  find  deists  apparently 
as  moral  and  virtuous  as  many  Calvinists,  do  we  think 
it  the  part  of  charity,  or  an  evidence  of  a  christian 
spirit,  to  rank  them  together  in  regard  to  their  prin- 
ciples, motives,  expectations,  and  the  ground  of  their 
hopes.  And  yet  we  feel,  that  we  may  with  just  as 
much  propriety  take  this  course  against  Calvinists, 
as  they  can  do  it  against  us. 

We  are  induced  to  embrace  our  views  of  the 
christian  doctrines,  not  simply  from  the  conviction, 
that  they  are  more  rational  and  scriptural  than  the 
prevailing  notions  of  many  of  our  christian  brethren, 
who  differ  from  us,  but  because  we  are  fully  per- 
suaded that  they  are  vastly  more  efficacious  in  pro- 
moting vital  godliness,  and  keeping  alive  the  pure 
spirit  of  religion,  the  essential  duties  of  piety  and 
morality.  They  are  calculated  to  draw  us  to  a  more 
fervent  love  and  reverence  of  God,  and  make  us 
more  devoted  to  the  interests  of  our  fellow-men,  by 
kindling  our  sympathy,  strengthening  our  good  affec- 
tions, and  enlarging  the  bounds  of  our  benevolence. 
This  obvious  tendency  of  our  principles  we  think  a 
very  strong  confirmation  of  their  truth,  and  it  is  one 
of  the  chief  reasons,  why  we  value  them  so  dearly, 
and  adhere   to  them  with   so  much   confidence  and 

joy- 

You  have  taken  much  pains  to  exhibit  the  picture 
in  another   light,  or  rather    to  show  it  in  darkness  ; 


LET.  I.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  287 

and  it  is  your  efforts  in  this  work  on  which  I  am  now 
about  to  make  a  few  brief  remarks.  But  the  com- 
parative moral  tendency  of  Unitarianism  and  Calvin- 
ism, as  you  have  started  the  subject,  is  too  large  a 
field  to  think  of  compassing  in  the  narrow  limits  pre- 
scribed to  these  letters.  To  trace  out  the  mischiev- 
ous consequences  of  the  calvinistic  doctrines,  both  as 
they  affect  the  character  of  God,  the  nature,  ability^ 
and  agency  of  man,  the  happiness  of  society,  the 
rules  of  virtue,  the  principles  of  piety,  and  the  prac- 
tice of  holiness,  would  not  be  a  work  of  limited  ex- 
tent. I  can  only  touch  upon  some  of  the  more  pro- 
minent particulars,  in  the  order  in  which  you  have 
brought  them  forward ;  by  which  it  will  be  seen,  in 
the  first  place,  that  you  have  very  imperfect  notions 
of  what  Unitarians  actually  preach;  and  in  the  se- 
cond place,  that  you  have  false  conceptions  of  the 
tendency  of  their  preaching. 

You  begin  by  saying,  that  unitarian  preachers  teach 
their  hearers^  that  human  nature  is  not  so  depraved  as 
Calvinists  believe.  This  is  not  denied.  But  the  inr 
ference,  which  you  would  draw  from  it,  is  de- 
nied, namely,  that  the  doctrine  as  taught  by  these 
preachers  is  less  moral  in  its  influence,  than  it  is  as 
taught  by  Calvinists.  In  the  opinion  of  all,  but  Cal- 
vinists themselves,  the  fact  is  the  contrary.  After 
the  doctrine  of  election  and  reprobation,  which  is  the 
combining  and  sustaining  principle,  the  life  and  soul 
of  Calvinism,  there  is  none,  which  derogates  more 
from  the  highest  moral  attributes  of  the  Deity,  or 
more  completely  destroys  all   moral  ability  in  man- 


288  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

than  the  notion  of  total  depravity^  as  explained  by 
Calvinists.  Allow  me  to  state  this  doctrine  in  the 
expressive  language  of  the  symbol  adopted  by  the 
Presbyterian  Church.  "  From  this  original  corrup- 
tion, whereby  we  are  utterly  indisposed,  disabled  and 
made  opposite  to  all  good,  and  wholly  inclined  to  all  eviL 
do  proceed  all  actual  transgressions."  Again,  "  Man, 
by  his  fall  into  a  state  of  sin,  hath  wholly  lost  all  abi- 
lity of  will  to  any  spiritual  good  accompanying  salva- 
tion ;  so  as  a  natural  man,  being  altogether  averse 
from  that  which  is  good,  and  dead  in  sin,  is  not  able, 
by  his  own  strength  to  convert  himself,  or  to  prepare 
himself  thereunto.''^*  From  this  statement,  which  is 
sufficiently  perspicuous,  it  Avould  seem,  that  from  our 
very  nature  we  have  no  power  to  do  any  good  thing ; 
that,  notwithstanding  our  endeavours,  every  word, 
thought,  and  deed,  is  a  heinous  offence  in  the  sight 
of  God,  adds  new  violence  to  the  flames  of  his  wrath, 
and  sinks  us  deeper  and  deeper  under  the  curse  of 
his  law.  And  what  is  worse,  not  only  every  act  is  a 
sin,  but  every  sin  is  equally  aggravating.  There  can 
be  no  gradation  in  crimes,  which  proceed  from  a 
heart  perfectly  depraved.  Hence,  the  infinitude  of 
sin  is  a  calvinistic  doctrine.t  Every  effort  we  make 
to  please  God,  by  seeking  holiness  and  obeying  his 
laws,  only  helps  to  sharpen  the  fierceness  of  his  an- 

*  Confession  of  Faith,  chap.  vi.  i  4.  ix.  0  3. 

II  know  Calvinists  are  not  agreed  on  this  subject  of  infinite  sin.  It  is  be- 
coming fashionable  to  deny  it,  but  no  one,  who  ventures  so  far,  can  be  account- 
ed a  consistent  calvinist.  With  this  feature  marred,  the  system  loses  a  very 
striking  part  of  its  symmetry. 


tET.  I.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  289 

ger ;  every  step  we  take  in  what  we  think  to  be 
the  path  of  duty,  virtue,  piety,  and  a  good  life,  car- 
ries us  so  much  further  towards  the  wretchedness 
and  ruin,  which,  it  would  appear,  are  our  just  portion 
for  being  what  God  has  made  us. 

To  say  nothing  of  the  extreme  absurdity  of  tliis 
doctrine  in  the  abstract,  Avhat  efiect  ought  it  to  pro- 
duce on  him,  who  fancies  he  sincerely  believes  it? 
What  must  necessarily  be  his  feelings  towards  his 
Maker  ?  Can  you  love  him,  who  punishes  you  for 
an  offence,  which  he  compels  you  to  commit?  What 
is  there  amiable,  or  benevolent,  or  glorious,  or  lovely 
in  such  a  Being  ?  Can  we  feel  gratitude  to  him, 
who  has  created  us  to  be  wretched,  not  by  reason  of 
our  own  follies,  or  transgressions,  but  by  his  arbitra- 
ry appointment?  If  it  were  possible  for  us  to  real- 
ize these  traits  of  his  character,  could  we  approach 
him  with  thanksgiving,  reverence,  and  praise  ?  Should 
Ave  not  detest  a  human  magistrate,  Avho  would  be  so 
unreasonable,  vindictive  and  cruel  ?  And  how  can 
we  love  that  in  God,  which  is  so  abhorrent  to  every 
principle  of  our  nature  in  men  ? 

Preach  this  doctrine  of  total  depravity,  and  total 
inability  to  any  man,  and  if  he  believes  you,  and  is 
in  his  senses,  he  certainly  will  not  strive  to  do  what 
you  tell  him  it  is  utterly  impossible  for  him  to  do. 
He  will  not  cultivate  the  love  of  God  and  man,  the 
mild,  amiable,  and  exalted  virtues ;  he  will  not  che- 
rish the  kind  affections,  the  spirit  of  meekness,  for- 
bearance and  charity;  he  will  not  administer  to  the 

necessitous,  nor  console  the  afflicted;  he  will  not  sub- 
t37 


290  iMORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [paIit  it, 

due  his  passions,  restrain  his  desires,  resist  tempta- 
tion, nor  avoid  evil, — he  will  make  no  attempt  to  do 
any  of  these  things,  and  for  a  very  good  reason, — all 
such  attempts  would  be  vain,  and  only  prove  his  fol- 
ly and  Aveakness.  What  rs  there  in  this  doctrine, 
preached  in  its  true  spirit  and  full  extent,  which 
would  be  likely  to  make  any  one  a  virtuous,  holy 
man,  a  good  citizen,  or  a  candidate  for  heaven?  Let 
it  be  generally  understood  in  the  world,  that  no  man 
can  possibly  do  any  other  than  a  wicked  action,  and 
that  every  action,  or  crime,  is  equally  wicked,  and 
do  you  believe  such  a  doctrine,  reduced  to  practice, 
would  contribute  much  to  the  peace  of  society,  or 
the  establishment  of  morals  and  religion?  Is  it  not 
evident  to  a  demonstration,  that  it  would  dissolve  all 
social  order,  break  the  cords  of  the  strongest  com- 
pact, poison  all  that  is  pure  in  principle,  and  destroy 
all  that  is  holy  in  practice  ?  Such  is  the  calvinistic 
doctrine  of  depravity,  when  exhibited  without  so- 
phistry, and  divested  of  the  clouds,  which  have  been 
gathered  around  it  in  the  misty  ages  of  school  theolo- 

Unitarians,  it  is  very  true,  preach  no  such  depravi- 
ty as  this.  They  dare  not  pamper  the  evil  propensi- 
ties of  men  by  preaching  to  them,  that  they  sin  from 
necessity,  and  have  no  power  to  amend  their  lives, 
and  please  their  Maker.  They  dare  not  preach  a 
doctrine  of  such  mischievous  tendency,  which  they 
do  not  find  supported  in  the  Scriptures,  and  at  which 
every  principle  of  the  understanding  revolts.  They 
preach,  that  all  men  arc  depraved,  deeply  depraved. 


f-ET.  I.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  291 

and  sinners  in  the  sight  of  God — not  by  the  will  and 
ajDpointment  of  their  Creator,  but  by  their  own 
choice,  their  neglect  of  duty,  and  their  obstinate  dis- 
obedience. 

There  is  no  theme,  in  fact,  on  which  unitarian 
preachers  dwell  more,  than  on  the  moral  depravity 
of  man.  This  is  the  moral  disease,  which  they  be- 
lieve the  religion  of  Jesus  was  intended  to  heal. 
As  a  free  agent,  man  has  contracted  this  disease, 
and  as  a  free  agent  he  has  the  power  of  applying 
an  effectual  remedy,  by  using  the  means  grant- 
ed in  the  religion  of  Christ.  They  describe  the 
w^'etched  state  of  the  sinner,  as  the  result  of  his  own 
follies,  his  abuse  of  his  better  faculties,  his  disregard 
of  the  counsel  and  chiding  of  conscience,  and  of  the 
obligations  of  the  divine  laws.  They  call  on  him  to 
awake  from  his  slumbers,  to  seek  light  rather  than 
darkness,  to  renew  his  depraved  heart,  to  lay  hold 
on  the  promises  of  Christ,  and  to  establish  the  hope 
of  their  fulfilment,  by  studying  the  will  of  God  as  re- 
vealed in  the  Gospel,  by  giving  strict  heed  to  the 
perfect  law  of  faith,  love,  and  righteousness,  which 
this  Gospel  contains,  by  walking  resolutely  and  unde- 
viatingly  in  the  footsteps  of  Christ,  and  by  making 
his  precepts,  and  these  alone,  the  rule  of  their  lives. 
They  urge  these  duties  by  all  the  motives  set  forth 
in  the  Gospel,  by  the  perfections  of  God,  the  depen- 
dence of  man,  the  promise  and  prospects  of  joy  to  the 
righteous,  the  threatenings  of  despair  and  suffering  to 
the  wicked.  They  afford  not  a  single  palliative  to 
the  sinner's  conscience,  not  a  single  excuse   for  his 


292  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

shameful  irresolution,  or  his  rebellious  obstinacy,  by 
telling  him,  that  his  Maker  has  formed  him  with  a 
total,  inherent,  irremediable  wickedness  of  nature, 
which  no  effort  of  his  own  can  remove.  Why  shoukl 
you  preach  repentance  and  holiness  to  such  a  being, 
unless  it  were  to  deride  his  impotency,  or  to  make 
still  deeper  the  shades  of  despair,  which  you  have 
caused  to  brood  upon  his  soul  ?  Why  suspend  the 
awful  judgments  of  God  over  the  impenitent  sinner, 
and  then  aggravate  his  misery  by  assuring  him,  that 
he  has  no  power  to  escape  ? 

It  is  unnecessary  to  pursue  the  parallel  farther.  I 
am  willing  to  let  the  decision  rest  on  these  short  hints. 
With  these  alone  let  the  question  be  submitted  to 
the  understanding  and  common  sense  of  every  reader, 
whether  the  doctrine  of  depravity,  as  taught  by  Cal- 
vinists,  of  Unitarians,  is  the  most  likely  to  strengthen 
the  cause  of  morals  ?  Whether  the  doctrine,  which 
makes  men  radically,  necessarily,  and  perfectly  wick- 
ed, and  takes  away  all  ability  of  improvement,  is  bet- 
ter calculated  to  fix  the  principles  of  religion  in  the 
soul,  and  to  produce  the  fruits  of  piety,  righteous- 
ness, and  a  good  life,  than  the  one,  which  lays  the 
sins  of  every  man  to  his  own  charge,  which  exhorts 
him  to  throw  off  the  shackles  he  has  thus  forged  for 
himself,  confess  his  follies,  repent  of  his  wicked 
deeds,  seek  God,  and  live  ? 


tET.  II.  i  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  293 


LETTER  II. 

Conversion,  or  Divine  Influence,  as  understood  by  Cal- 
vinists  and   Unitarians. 


The  next  point  of  Calvinism,  from  the  denial  of 
which  you  infer  the  immorality  of  Unitarians,  is  that 
of  irresistible  grace,  or,  as  it  is  otherwise  denominat- 
ed, special  grace,  eifectual  calling,  extraordinary  di- 
vine influence,  regeneration,  or  conversion. 

In  the  calvinistic  sense.  Unitarians  no  doubt  deny, 
that  this  doctrine  has  any  foundation  in  Scripture,  or 
any  other  than  an  evil  influence  on  the  character  of 
men ;  but  when  you  assert  in  general  language,  that 
they  teach  regeneration  to  be  unnecessary,  you  mistake. 
So  far  from  denying  the  necessity  of  regeneration,  it 
is  a  truth  well  known  to  all,  who  have  any  accurate 
knowledge  of  the  subject,  that  among  no  denomina- 
tion of  christians  is  it  preached  more  earnestly,  or 
more  constantly,  than  among  Unitarians.  They  con- 
sider it  a  fundamental  doctrine  of  religion,  and  im- 
mediately connected  with  the  doctrine  of  depravity. 
They  believe,  as  firmly  as  Calvinlsts,  that  men  are 
sinners,  and  must  be  reformed,  that  they  are  deprav- 
ed and  must  be  renewed.  This  reformation,  or  re- 
newal, they  call  regeneration,  or  conversion,  and  hold 
it  to  be  absolutely  essential  before  any  one  can  be  in 


294  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.         [part  iv. 

that  state  of  holiness,  and  freedom  from  sin,  Avhlch 
will  fit  him  for  the  eternal  presence  of  God,  and  the 
blessings  of  heaven,  as  revealed  in  the  Gospel.  Since 
this  is  the  truth,  it  is  obvious  Avith  what  singular  in- 
accuracy your  assertion  was  made. 

In  attempting  to  defend  your  position,  that  we 
"■  look  in  vain  for  the  monuments  of  the  reforming 
and  purifying  power"  of  Unitarianism,  instead  of  ad- 
ducing facts  and  examples,  which  alone  can  have  any 
weight  in  a  case  of  this  nature,  you  inquire  whether 
sound  conversions,  or  genuine  revivals  of  religion  are 
known  among  Unitarians.  What  is  this  inquiry  to 
the  purpose?  Do  you  find  good  men,  exemplary  in 
their  lives,  constant  in  their  devotions,  manifesting 
practical  love  to  their  neighbour  and  their  God  ?  If 
you  have  found  such,  you  have  had  before  your  eyes 
the  monuments,  which  you  say  are  wanting.  The 
question  relates  simply  to  the  character  of  those,  who 
have  embraced  this  faith,  and  not  to  the  means  by 
Avhich  this  character  has  been  formed  ;  to  the  exist- 
ing monuments  of  its  power,  and  not  to  the  manner 
in  which  these  monuments  have  been  reared.  Why 
ask  about  conversions,  if  you  find  the  fruits  of  con- 
version? To  say  these  do  not  exist,  is  begging  the 
question ;  it  is  the petitio  principii  of  the  dialectician  ; 
taking  for  granted  the  very  thing  which  you  were 
called  on  to  prove. 

You  have  evaded  this  the  most  important  part  of 
the  subject,  and  drawn  the  attention  of  your  readers 
to  the  good  effects,  which  you  say  have  been  produ- 
ced in  particular  cases  by  your  own  sentiments.  After 


LIST,  n.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  295 

a  vivid  picture  of  this  sort,  you  abruptly  ask  the 
question,  whether  "  Unitarianism  can  show  such  ef- 
fects ?''  And  then  answer  it  as  abruptly,  "if  it  can, 
they  are  unknown  to  me."  Do  you  think  this  good 
reasoning  ?  Are  you  willing  to  judge  of  the  effects  of 
Unitarianism  "  all  over  the  world,"  by  your  personal 
observation?  As  you  probably  have  never  lived  a 
week  together  in  a  society  composed  of  Unitarians, 
how  is  it  possible,  let  these  effects  have  been  what 
they  might,  that  they  should  not  be  unknown  to  you? 
Under  such  circumstances,  how  could  you  know  the 
power  of  unitarian  principles  to  subdue  the  stubborn 
will,  soften  the  hardened  heart,  humble  the  proud, 
restrain  the  vicious,  call  forth  the  pious  affections  of 
the  devout  worshipper,  promote  christian  harmony, 
purity,  and  love,  and  in  short,  to  ensure  the  conduct 
of  a  sincere,  humble,  and  faithful  follower  of  Jesus? 
These  are  things,  which  work,  or  ought  to  work,  si- 
lently in  the  heart,  and  show  themselves  in  the  tem- 
per and  private  character  of  individuals.  The  mo- 
ment they  are  allowed  to  go  abroad,  and  be  blazon- 
ed to  the  world,  they  leave  no  trivial  grounds  for  sus- 
pecting more  of  hypocrisy,  than  of  humble  piety,  or 
of  the  raovings  of  the  holy  Spirit  of  God.  Hence  your 
argument  for  the  immorality  of  Unitarians,  drawn 
from  your  ignorance  of  the  actual  effects  of  their 
principles,  is  as  illogical  as  it  is  uncharitable.  It  is 
certainly  extraordinary,  that  you  should  think  it  suf- 
ficient proof  against  the  christian  morals  and  piety  of 
any  sect,  that  such  exercises  as  usually  attend  these 
graces  were  vnknown  to  yov.  when  your  per^^onal  oh- 


296  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [paut  iv. 

seryation  was  so  circumscribed,  and  your  means  of 
knowledge  so  limited. 

It  is  no  part  of  my  undertaking  to  boast  of  the 
high  religious  attainments  of  those  with  whom  I  ac- 
cord in  sentiment,  and  unite  in  Avorship,  or  to  hold 
them  up  as  more  holy  than  other  christians,  and  ready 
to  cry  out  on  all  occasions,  like  Jehu  of  old,  "  Come, 
see  my  zeal  for  the  Lord."  I  aim  at  nothing  more 
than  a  plain  defence,  a  bare  vindication.  1  shall  not, 
therefore,  impose  any  tax  upon  your  patience  by  go- 
ing into  a  history  of  their  conversions,  or  detailing 
remarkable  instances  of  their  piety,  self  denial,  hu- 
mility ;  of  their  patience  in  tribulation,  and  meekness 
under  persecution;  of  their  forbearance  when  assailed 
by  the  reproaches  and  scorn  of  the  world  ;  of  their 
perseverance  through  evil  report  and  good  report  in 
accomplishing  what  their  principles  and  the  voice  of 
conscience  dictate,  and  in  fine,  of  their  joyful  triumph 
over  every  calamity,  even  death  itself,  while  sustain- 
ed by  the  bright  hopes,  and  cheering  anticipations  in- 
spired by  their  views  of  the  religion  of  the  Saviour. 
These  things  I  willingly  leave  to  speak  for  them- 
selves, and  have  much  reason  to  hope  and  trust,  that 
they  will  speak  loudly  to  every  honest  inquirer  and 
candid  observer.  Had  you  known  more  of  the  per- 
sons, with  whose  religious  feelings  you  have  dealt  so 
harshly,  I  am  constrained  to  believe  you  would  have 
been  less  ready  to  ask,  "  who  has  ever  heard"  of 
these  things  ? 

What  strikes  one  most  forcibly  in  your  view  of  this 
subject,  is,  that  you  confound  distinctions,  and  make 


r£T.  II.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  297 

no  difference  between  conversion,  and  the  object  to 
be  obtained  by  conversion.  Yet  surely  these  are  not 
the  same  thing.  Conversion  is  a  means  for  the  at- 
tainment of  a  certain  end.  And  what  is  this  end, 
but  such  a  measure  of  knowledge,  virtue,  piety,  and 
holiness,  as  constitutes  a  truly  religious  character  ? 
Conversion  is  valuable  only  for  its  eifects,  and  yet 
you  speak  of  it  as  being  itself  the  only  thing  of  im- 
portance, and  as  if  these  effects  could  be  produced  in 
no  way  except  by  the  influence  of  this  doctrine,  not 
as  others  think  they  ought  to  interpret  it,  but  as  you 
choose  to  interpret  it  yourself. 

Admit  the  fact,  that  Unitarians  do  not  hold  the 
necessity  of  conversion  in  the  calvinistic  sense  ;  sup- 
pose them  to  believe  that  God  is  not  limited  in  his 
power  or  wisdom,  and  may  employ  a  great  variety 
of  means  in  bringing  his  rational  creatures  to  a  sense 
of  their  sins,  a  knowledge  of  their  duty,  an  humble 
contrition,  sincere  repentance,  and  practical  holiness. 
By  what  process  can  these  facts  be  framed  into  an  ar- 
gument against  their  moral  character?  Morality  does 
not  consist  in  a  doctrine,  an  opinion,  or  a  pretence.  The 
apostle  says,  that  the  fruit  of  the  spirit  is,  in  all,  good- 
ness,and  righteousness,  and  truth.  Where  this  fruit  ap- 
pears, why  do  you  stop  to  ask  by  what  operations  of 
the  spirit  it  has  been  produced?  Are  you  not  content- 
ed, that  God  should  have  taken  his  own  way  ?  Uni- 
tarians hold,  not  less  than  other  Christians,  that  their 
sins  must  be  forsaken,  their  wicked  hearts  renewed, 
and  all  their  passions,  thoughts,  and  afl'ections,  brought 
into  subjection  to  the  will  of  God,  before  they  can 
38 


298  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

expect  his  promised  favour,  or  have  any  hopes  of 
the  rewards  of  his  glory.  But  they  do  not,  hke 
Calvinists,  hold  that  God  is  restricted  In  the  mode 
he  may  adopt  to  accomplish  this  purpose  ;  nor  do  they 
consider  the  mode  of  greater  moment  than  the  pur- 
pose itself. 

Let  us  now  attend  to  the  doctrine  under  conside- 
ration, as  described  by  Calvinists,  and  then  proceed 
to  examine  its  moral  Influence,  as  compared  with  that 
of  unitarian  views  of  the  same  subject.  The  cal- 
vinistic  notion  of  regeneration,  or  conversion,  has  for 
its  basis  the  total  depravity  of  human  nature.  Since 
this  takes  away  all  moral  ability  from  man,  he  can 
do  nothing  towards  rcoeneratinor  himself.  As  the 
Confession  of  Faith  testifies,  he  cannot  even  prepare 
himself  for  any  good  purpose.  No  •  alternative  re- 
mains. It  must  be  wholly  the  work  of  divine  power. 
It  is  made  sure  by  the  sovereign  decree  of  election, 
which  men  can  do  nothing  either  to  resist,  or  pro- 
cure. God  has  not  only  arbitrarily,  and  uncondition- 
ally, appointed  a  certain  number  to  eternal  life,  but 
he  has  "  fore-ordained  all  the  means  thei'eunto."  The 
agency  of  man  is  as  completely  out  of  the  question, 
as  if  he  were  a  block  of  marble,  or  a  stock  of  wood. 
"  Neither  are  any  other  redeemed  by  Christ,  effec- 
tually called,  justified,  adopted,  sanctified,  and  saved, 
but  the  elect  only."  And  to  give  a  consistent  finish- 
ing to  the  whole,  it  is  added,  '*  The  re?t  of  mankind, 
God  was  pleased — to  pass  by,  and  to  ordain  them  to 


LET.  n.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM,  299 

dishonour,  and  wrath  for  their  sin,  to  the  praise  of 
his  glorious  justice."* 

And  again  ;  "All  those  whom  God  hath  predesti- 
nated unto  life,  and  those  only,  he  is  pleased,  in  his 
appointed  and  accepted  time,  effectually  to  call  by 
his  word  and  spirit,  out  of  that  state  of  sin  and  death, 
in  which  they  are  by  nature,  to  grace  and  salvation, 
by  Jesus  Christ. — This  effectual  call  is  of  God's  free 
and  special  grace  alone,  not  from  any  thing  at  all 
foreseen  in  man,  who  is  altogether  passive  therein^  until, 
being  quickened  and  removed  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  he 
is  thereby  enabled  to  answer  this  call,  and  to  embrace 
the  grace  offered  and  conveyed  in  it."t  From  these 
words  it  seems,  that  the  conversion  of  a  sinner  con- 
sists in  a  simple  execution  of  a  divine  decree  made 
from  all  eternity,  without  any  regard  to  the  future 
disposition  or  conduct  of  the  person  to  be  converted, 
or  as  it  is  expressed  in  another  place,  "  without  any 
foresight  of  faith  or  good  works."  The  sinner  has 
no  concern  in  the  work,  for  he  is  declared  to  be  "  al- 
together passive  therein."  This  is  plain  language, 
and  needs  no  illustration. 

According  to  the  calvinistic  scheme,  therefore,  all 
who  are  saved  are  regenerated  by  the  unalterable 
purpose,  and  irresistible  power  of  the  Almighty, 
The  rest  are  condemned,  and  absolutely  deprived  of 
all  means  of  regeneration,  by  the  same  arbitrary  de- 
termination.    The  wrath  of  their  Maker  is  kindled 

*  Confession  of  Faith,  chap.  III.  ^  6.  7. 
t  Ibid.  chap.  X.  »  1.  2. 


300  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

against  them  from  the  moment  of  their  birth, and  he 
pursues  them  with  his  relentless  rage  throughout 
every  period  of  their  existence.  This  is  a  doctrine, 
it  is  true,  which  the  wiser  sort  of  Calvinists  of  the 
present  day  strive  much  to  keep  out  of  sight.  The 
same  prudent  caution  is  exercised  in  your  Sermon 
and  Reply.  It  is  nevertheless  a  most  prominent  doc- 
trine of  Calvinism  ;  and  in  former  times,  when  men 
loved  mysteries  more  than  truth,  and  while  the  dark- 
ness of  the  middle  ages  was  still  lingering  in  the  hu- 
man mind,  it  was  a  doctrine,  which  its  advocates  were 
not  ashamed  to  avow,  nor  afraid  to  defend. 

That  the  above  conclusions  are  not  loosely  drawn, 
and  give  no  distorted  view  of  the  subject,  as  under- 
stood by  Calvinists,  might  be  shown,  if  it  were  ne- 
cessary, by  appealing  to  their  most  celebrated  Avri- 
ters.  No  man.  if  I  mistake  not,  is  accounted  a  more 
able  expounder  of  the  dark  things  of  Calvinism,  than 
Heiman  Witsius  ;  no  man,  perhaps,  has  descended 
farther  into  the  hidden  corners  of  this  mystical  sys- 
tem. He  tells  us,  that"  the  covenant  of  grace,  Avith 
respect  to  us,  has  no  conditions  ;''^  and  also,  "that  a 
right  to  life,  neither  is,  nor  can  be  founded  on  any  ac- 
tions of  ours,  but  on  the  righteousness  of  our  Lord 
alone,  who  having  perfectly  fulAlled  the  righteousness 
of  the  law  for  us,  nothino'  can  in  justice  be  required  of 
us  to  perform.,  in  order  to  acquire  a  right  already 
purchased  for  us.  And,  indeed,  in  this  all  the  ortho- 
dox readily  agree."  And  afterwards  he  says  of  the 
covenant  of  grace,  "  it  is  not  possible  it  should  be 
made  void  by  any  unbelief  of  the  elect,  nor  acquire 


XET,  n.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  301 

its  Stability  from  any  faith  of  man."  He  quotes 
Cloppenburg,  Junius,  and  other  great  names  to  the 
same  eilect.  He  makes  Junius  say,  that  "  the  condi- 
tions being  fui filled  by  the  angel  of  the  covenant, 
the  catholic  church  was  through  and  for  him  consti- 
tuted heir  of  eternal  life  without  any  condition^* 

We  thus  see  in  what  con-^ists  the  means  of  rege- 
Deration,  as  taught  by  Calvinists.  It  is  completely  an 
arbitrary,  necessary  work,  in  which  the  individual, 
whatever  exercises  of  mind,  or  ciiange  of  characier, 
he  may  go  through,  has  no  freedom  of  thought,  will, 
or  action.  The  elect  must  be  regenerated,  they  must 
be  saved  ;  those  not  elected  cannot  be  regenerated, 
they  cannot  be  saved.  The  doctrine  irresistibly 
comes  to  this  point,  however  it  may  be  modified,  ex- 
plained, or  smoothed  over. 

As  Unitarians,  and  many  christians  of  other  deno- 
minations, can  find  no  such  doctrine  in  the  Scriptures, 
but  conceive  all  the  positive  parts,  and,  indeed,  the 
whole  tenour  of  scripture  opposed  to  it,  they  can- 
not of  course  believe  it  in  the  sense  in  which  it  is 
here  stated.  And  if  they  could  find  evidence,  that 
the  mode  of  irresistible  influence  is  sometimes  re- 
sorted to  by  the  Deity  to  convert  sinners,  the  power- 
ful testimony  of  experience  would  convince  them, 
that  the  doctrine  which   teaches  the  necessity  of  this 

*  Witsius'  Economy  of  the  Covenants,  p.  402  ;  Chapter  on  Ciod's  Covenant 
with  the  Elect.  The  above  quotations  are  mane  f;oni  the  New-York  edition 
of  the  English  translation  of  this  woik.  This  is  ceitaiiily  a  very  wretched 
translation,  but  we  are  assured  in  the  preface,  that  "  it  gives  the  author's  true 
sense." 


302  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

mode  under  all  circumstances,  Is  most  fallacious  in  its 
indications,  and  most  injurious  in  its  consequences. 

If  there  be  any  truth,  or  any  value  in  the  doctrine, 
it  must  carry  with  itself  an  unfailing  testimony. 
That  is,  persons  under  the  arbitrary  operations  of 
the  Spirit  must  have  infallible  means  of  knowing  the 
fact,  that  they  may  not  be  deceived  by  their  own 
imaginations,  and  be  led  into  a  false  and  dangerous 
security.  An  irresistible  influence  of  the  Deity  is  m 
all  respects  miraculous,  and  as  such  must  operate  with 
a  violence  on  the  established  laws  of  the  human 
constitution,  which  cannot  be  mistaken.  And  yet, 
Avhat  has  been  the  test  to  which  appeals  have  uni- 
versally been  made  ?  Has  it  not  been  certain  im- 
pressions, emotions,  feelings,  transports,  ecStacies, 
which  are  usually  the  exuberant  growth  of  a  warm 
imagination?  Has  there  ever  been  an  instance  in 
which  appeals  have  been  made  to  the  understand- 
ino;  ?  Has  any  one  ever  made  it  appear,  that  his  in- 
tellect was  enlightened,  his  judgment  improved,  or 
his  wisdom  increased  by  the  irresistible  agency  of  the 
divine  Spirit?  No.  How  is  it,  then,  that  the  spirit  of 
God  always  acts  upon  that  quality  of  our  nature, 
Avhich  of  all  others  is  the  most  fallible,  fluctuating, 
and  deceptive  ?  The  very  same  eflects,  and  to  their 
fullest  extent,  which  are  urged  as  a  proof  of  divine 
interposition,  are  frequently  produced  by  natural 
causes,  and  exist  where  there  is  no  renewal  of  heart, 
or  reformation  of  character.  Ts  it  credible,  that  the 
Supreme  Being  descends  into  the  hearts  of  men  with 
a  miraculous   agency  of    his  Spirit,   without   giving 


AKT.  ii.J  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  303 

them  at  the  same  time  light  and  power  to  judge  be- 
tween his  operations,  and  the  deceptions  of  a  heated 
imagination  ? 

You  will  say,  probably,  that  such  persons  as  are 
really  the  objects  of  this  agency,  are  never  without 
a  conviction,  which  with  them  amounts  to  absolute 
certainty.  I  am  aware  this  is  asserted  by  many,  who 
are  sincere,  and  have  a  confidence  in  the  reality  of 
their  impressions.  But,  in  my  mind,  no  stronger  proof 
can  be  given  of  the  fallaciousness  of  the  doctrine. 
In  the  first  place,  their  convictions  come  through  the 
feelings  and  the  fancy.  And  then,  these  persons 
are  by  no  means  always  distinguished  for  more  than 
ordinary  purity  of  morals,  or  warmth  of  piety;  so 
that  it  has  been  said,  with  too  much  truth,  by  a  wri- 
ter more  distinguished  for  his  genius  than  his  piety, 
"  if  we  are  told  a  man  is  religious,  we  still  ask,  what 
are  his  morals  .^"  And  last  of  all,  these  persons  often 
have  totally  opposite  opinions  respecting  some  of  the 
most  important  articles  of  christian  truth,  which  they 
all  profess  with  equal  confidence  to  receive  from  a 
divine  illumination.  But  the  Spirit  of  God  can  dic- 
tate only  truth,  and  truth  is  always  the  same.  With 
what  encouragement  can  we  rely  on  the  convictions 
of  those,  who,  with  equal  sincerity  and  confidence, 
make  contradictory  assertions  ?  When  it  shall  hap- 
pen, that  all  persons,  who  profess  to  have  immediate 
aid  from  above,  to  free  them  from  sin  and  enlighten 
them  with  truth,  shall  be  found  uniformly  more  zea- 
lous in  doing  the  deeds  of  piety  and  love,  than  other 
christians  of  humbler   pretensions ;    and  when  thev 


304  MORAL  TENDENCY  Of  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

shall  aojree  in  reportino;  the  truths,  which  they  have 
received  from  the  instructions  of  the  spirit,  so  far  at 
least  as  to  avoid  contradictions  and  inconsistences, 
they  will  exhibit  better  reasons  for  believing  them- 
selves actu:ited  by  the  irresistible  agency  of  the  Spi- 
rit of  God. 

Again,  if  a  change  is  thus  miraculously  wrought, 
how  does  it  happen,  that  in  such  a  great  number  of 
instances  the  eifect  soon  dies  away  ?  Look  around 
among  those,  who  have  been  the  subjects  of  what 
are  commonly  called  religious  revivals,  and  observe 
how  large  a  proportion  return  in  a  short  time  to  their 
former  condition  and  habits.  The  most  zealous,  con- 
fident, and  ecstatic,  will  frequently  be  among  the  first 
to  sink  back  to  the  apathy,  from  Avhich  at  one  time 
they  imagined  themselves  to  have  been  raised  by  the 
special  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Will  you  say  that 
such  are  not  truly  converted,  or  that  they  resist  the 
spirit  ?  The  first  is  certain,  but  of  the  last  who  is 
to  judge  f  The  person,  who  falls  away,  is  as  certain 
of  being  under  a  spiritual  influence,  as  any  one  who 
retains  this  conviction  for  years,  and  even  through 
his  whole  life.  But  falling  away  was  a  proof  tliat 
he  was  deceived.  Very  true  ;  yet  if  one  may  be  de- 
ceived for  a  month  or  a  day,  so  may  another  as  long 
as  he  lives.  Hence  it  is  the  very  excess  of  presump- 
tion to  set  up  any  pretensions,  or  make  any  assertions 
in  the  case. 

Nor  ought  any  one  to  rely  on  this  kind  of  influ- 
ence, till  he  can  prove  that  the  days  of  miracles  have 
never  ceased.  Conversion,  upon  calvinistic  principles. 


LET.  II.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  305 

is  as  much  a  miracle,  as  it  would  be  to  stop  the 
sun  in  its  course,  or  raise  the  dead  to  hfe.  But 
as  no  proof  can  be  advanced,  that  miracles  have 
been  wrought  since  the  time  of  the  Apostles  even 
for  great  purposes,  such  as  promoting  the  divine  dis- 
pensations, or  the  general  interests  of  mankind;  where 
is  the  humility,  modesty,  or  good  sense  in  any  man's 
pretending,  that  the  Supreme  Being  has  condescend- 
ed to  change  the  course  of  nature  in  his  behalf,  es- 
pecially when  the  same  argument,  which  he  uses 
to  convince  himself  of  this  fact,  is  used  with  equal 
assurance  by  others,  who  are  confessedly  deceived? 
It  is  hardly  necessary  to  dwell  on  the  moral  ten- 
dency of  such  a  scheme.  It  must  be  abundantly  ob- 
vious to  every  mind,  which  is  capable  of  moral  per- 
ception. Preach  to  the  sinner  that  he  can  do  no- 
thing to  free  himself  from  wickedness ;  that  if  he  is 
ever  regenerated,  it  will  be  the  consequence  of  an 
irresistible  influence  from  heaven,  which  he  can  nei- 
ther hasten  nor  retard  ;  and  what  better  apology  can 
you  afford  him  for  continuing  in  his  sin  ?  Nothing 
could  be  more  unwise  in  him,  than  to  make  any  tem- 
poral sacrifices  for  a  promised  spiritual  good.  Why 
should  he  give  up  a  present  gratification,  enjoy- 
ment, or  possession,  for  any  thing  in  prospect  ?  No 
present  sacrifices  can  alter  his  condition,  or  change 
future  events.  If  he  is  one  of  the  chosen,  the  time 
will  certainly  come,  when  he  will  be  regenerated, 
and  all  his  sins  will  be  blotted  out  ;  if  he  is  not  one 
of  the  chosen,  his  doom  is  fixed,  and  his  wretched- 
ness cannot  be  aggravated  by  any  wicked  excesses, 
39 


306  xMOKAL  TEi\DEl\Cy  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

or  criminal  pleasures.  That  man  must  be  a  casuist 
of  no  ordinary  acuteness,  who  can  detect  in  this  doc- 
trine, faithfully  represented,  any  other  tendency  than 
to  evil  and  immorality. 

As  the  unconverted  are  passive  in  this  work,  they 
can  do  nothing  till  they  are  moved  by  the  Spirit ;  and 
you  may  be  quite  sure  men  will  make  no  vigorous 
attempts  to  do  what  they  are  persuaded  is  impossi- 
ble, particularly  when  these  attempts  interfere  with 
their  Avorldly  Avishes,  demand  sacrifices,  and  oppose 
their  inclinations.  They  will  proceed  in  the  road  of 
sin,  and  the  way  to  ruin,  with  very  little  concern, 
while  they  feel  that  they  are  spell  bound,  and  can 
turn  neither  to  the  right  nor  to  the  left,  till  the  kind 
hand  of  heaven  shall  break  their  chains,  take  the 
scales  from  their  eyes,  and  force  them  into  the  path 
of  light,  safety,  and  peace.  And  after  this  benevo- 
lent deed  of  heaven  is  performed,  it  by  no  means 
appears,  that  all  danger  is  removed.  Human  nature 
is  not  changed.  Much  room  is  left  to  cherish  many 
seeds  of  no  good  promise,  and  to  foster  the  growth 
of  many  unpropitious  affections,  whose  fruits  will  add 
little  to  the  stock  of  virtue,  of  to  the  ornament  of  a 
good  life.  The  very  self-complacency,  which  allows 
a  man  to  rank  himself  in  a  station  above  his  bre- 
thren, and  to  claim  in  his  favour  the  peculiar  agency 
of  his  Maker,  denotes  much  of  spiritual  |)ride,  and 
but  little  of  that  meek  and  lowly  spirit  inculcated 
by  the  example,  doctrines,  and  commands  of  our  Sa- 
viour. 

The  tendency  of  a  doctrine  is  best  ascertained  by 


i.ET.  II.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  307 

regarding  its  effects  where  it  has  the  greatest  pow- 
er of  action  ;  and  if  we  trace  back  the  checkered 
history  of  the  Church,  it  will  present  us  with  little, 
which  we  could  desire  to  remember  respecting  the 
moral  code  of  those  sects,  which  have  made  the 
theory  of  a  miraculous  conversion  a  leadmg  tenet  in 
their  belief.* 

History  also  affords  a  dismal  picture  of  the  deplo- 
rable effects  of  this  doctrine,  in  the  annals  of  fanati- 
cism. Men  have  gone  mad  in  the  belief,  that  their 
frenzy  was  the  inward  workings  of  the  Spirit  of  God. 
Next  have  come  murders  and  rapines,  persecutions 
and  tortures,  hatred  and  malice,  and  every  detesta- 
ble vice,  which  could  disgrace  human  nature  and  de- 
moralize society.  Keep  within  the  compass  of  the 
Reformation,  and  run  through  the  records  of  fanati- 
cism from  the  fratricide  of  Alphonsus  Diaz,  to  the  pite- 
ous delusions,  which  in  recent  times  have  bewildered 


*  The  Antinomians  make  election  and  iiresislible  grace  the  prominent  fea- 
tures of  their  faith.  "  As  the  elect,"  they  say,  "cannot  fall  from  grace,  nor 
forfeit  the  divine  favour,  so  it  follows,  that  the  wicked  actions  they  commit, 
and  the  violations  of  the  divine  law,  with  which  they  are  chargeable,  are  not 
really  sinful,  nor  are  to  be  coTrndered  as  instances  of  their  departing  from  the 
law  of  God;  and  that  conse^^Wntly,  they  have  no  occasion  either  to  forsake 
their  sins,  or  to  break  them  oft'  by  repentance."  Mosheim's  Church  History, 
Vol.  F.  p.  412. 

They  maintain,  that  "the  elect  cannot  possibly  do  any  thing  displeasing  to 
God,  and  that  consequently  no  sins,  however  monstrous,  would  at  all  impair 
or  endanger  their  everlasting  blessedness."  Grant's  Summary,  Vol.  II.  p. 
499. 

Such  is  the  literal  import  of  the  doctrine  when  undisguised  and  unmixed 
with  others  of  a  more  rational  and  moral  nature.  That  its  effects  on  the  mo- 
rals, when  left  to  have  its  free  and  natural  tendency,  have  been  most  perni- 
cious, will  abundantly  appear  to  any  one  who  will  be  at  the  trouble  ofturnine 
to  the  above  references. 


308  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

the  followers  of  Huntington,  Brothers,  and  Southcott. 
The  madness  of  Muncer,  Stubner  and  Storck,  who 
kindled  a  civil  war  in  Germany,  sacrificed  the  lives 
of  many  credulous  followers,  and  committed  the 
greatest  excesses  under  pretence  of  being  actuated 
by  a  divine  impulse  ;  the  wild  reveries,  which  broke 
out  in  so  many  shapes  of  intolerance  and  cruelty 
durine:  the  reig-n  of  the  unfortunate  Charles,  and  the 
existence  of  the  Commonwealth;  the  ravings  of 
Muggleton  and  Reeves,  who  declared  it  to  be  the  un- 
pardonable sin  to  reject  what  they  called  their  spiri- 
tual message ;  tlie  scorching  zeal  of  the  Puritans, 
which  was  ready  to  burst  out  with  its  consuming  fires 
upon  all,  who  did  not  profess  to  seek  the  Lord  under 
the  same  influences  as  themselves, — these  facts  and 
events,  with  numerous  others  of  a  similar  nature, 
have  been  so  many  practical  illustrations  of  the  doc- 
trine of  conversion  by  an  irresistible  agency  of  the 
divine  Spirit. 

Now  we  frankly  confess  we  cannot  receive  a  doc- 
trine as  coming  from  God,  not  a  trace  of  which  we 
can  find  in  the  Scriptures,  which  is  so  fallacious  in  the 
testimony  it  gives  of  a  divine  origin,  which  is  so  de- 
fective in  its  practical  tendency,  and  which  has  actu- 
ally been  made  an  instrument  in  bringing  down  the 
o-reatest  disorders,  evils,  and  wretchedness  upon  the 
church,  and  upon  society.  The  only  authority  on 
which  it  rests,  is  the  testimony  of  individuals.  And 
in  what  docs  this  consist  ?  It  appeals  to  certain  emo- 
tions, feelings,  and  frames  of  mind,  which  may  come 
as  readily  from  rational  and  mechanical,  as  from  spin- 


LET.  II.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  309 

tual  sources.  Speaking  of  the  particulars  of  this  tes- 
timony, the  eloquent  James  Foster  observes,  "  They 
give  a  handle  to  every  wretched  enthusiast  to  im- 
pute his  ravings,  and  follies,  and  wild  starts  of  imagi- 
nation, to  the  spirit  of  the  living  God.  And  thus 
they  consecrate  delusion  and  imposture,  and,  if  these 
be  of  a  licentious  and  impure  tendency,  enable  them 
with  the  more  ease  to  extirpate  the  natural  seeds  of 
virtue,  and  corrupt  the  morals."* 

Compare  with  this  calvinistic  doctrine,  the  means 
and  acts  of  regeneration,  as  taught  by  Unitarians. 
They  believe,  that  God  has  made  his  rational  crea- 
tures capable  of  moral  goodness  by  a  just  use  of  the 
qualifications  and  powers,  which  he  has  conferred  on 
them.  The  commands  in  scripture  to  forsake  sin, 
and  the  injunctions  to  repentance  and  holiness,  they 
take  to  be  literal  and  obligatory.  They  cannot  con- 
ceive that  God  would  empower  his  Son  to  give  to 
the  world  rules  of  right  action,  and  accompany  these 

*  James  Fostcr''s  Sermonx,  vol.  ii.  p.  111.  The  natural  effects  of  this  doc- 
trine are  not  unaptly  portrayed  by  Bishop  Hoadly,  in  what  he  says  of  the  ex- 
tent to  which  some  persons  pursue  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  merits  as  flowing 
from  imputed  righteousness,  or  a  satisfaction.  Speaking  of  those,  who  are 
mistaken  in  the  terms  of  divine  acceptance,  he  says,  "  Tliey  are  all  such  as, 
(though  they  do  not  say  it  and  speak  it  aloud,  in  so  many  words,  yet,)  think 
and  speak  in  such  a  manner  of  the  merits  of  Christ's  sufferings,  and  the  impu- 
tation of  his  personal  holiness  to  believers,  as  to  make  his  moral  laws  of  none 
effect,  and  to  render  all  virtue  in  Christians  a  poor,  insignificant,  unnecessary 
matter  ;  unless  it  be  the  great  virtue  of  applying  the  merits  of  Christ  to  our- 
selves, a  virtue,  which  they  who  have  most  spirits  are  most  frequently  observed 
to  be  masters  of,  and  which  hath  been  too  often  seen  to  be  founded  upon  the 
"reatest  degree  of  confidence  and  the  greatest  degree  of  guilt,  mixed  and  tem- 
pered together  by  a  strong  fancy  and  imagination."  Hoadly  on  the  Terms 
of  Acceptance  with  God,  p.  77. 


3l6  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM,  [part  iv. 

rules  with  promises  and  threateiiings,  with  exhorta- 
tions and  commands,  unless  they  were  addressed  to 
beings,  who  can  be  influenced  by  these  motives,  and 
daily  and  hourly  render  an  entire  obedience.  The 
whole  body  of  gospel  precepts  would  be  without 
meaning  and  value,  on  any  other  supposition.  Re- 
pentance, obedience,  and  holiness  are  the  conditions 
of  eternal  life,  with  which  the  rules  of  the  Gospel, 
strictly  observed,  enable  every  human  being  to  com- 
ply. Unitarian  preachers,  therefore,  think  it  their 
duty  to  enforce  the  necessity  of  these  conditions,  and 
not  to  preach  to  sinners,  that,  by  any  "  covenant," 
salvation  is  ensured  "  without  condition."  The  work 
of  regeneration,  to  be  scriptural  and  sound,  they 
think  should  be  gciing  on  every  day.  It  is  the  busi»- 
riess  of  life,  and  should  not  be  forgotten,  or  neglected, 
amidst  the  busiest  scenes  of  our  temporal  avocations 
and  duties. 

In  this  work  they  believe  the  Spirit  of  God  aids 
and  guides,  encourages  and  strengthens.  Its  influ- 
ence is  efficient  or  ineifectual  according  to  the  dispo- 
sition of  every  individual,  and  the  efforts  which  are 
made  to  resist  evil  and  conform  to  the  laws  of  virtue. 
God  is  always  present  with  his  Spirit  to  assist  those, 
who  ask  his  favour,  and  who  will  profit  by  his  counsels. 
He  does  not  act  upon  them  with  a  power,  which 
they  cannot  oppose.  This  would  be  destroying  mo- 
ral freedom,  and  rendering  the  rules  and  motives  of 
the  Gospel  unnecessary  and  inoperative. 

Many  things  conspire  to  produce  the  change  of  le- 
genefation,  or  a  thorough  renewal  of  heart  and  cha- 


LIT.  II.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  3  j  1 

racter.  Means  are  used  here  as  in  every  thing  else. 
The  moral  discipline,  to  which  all  persons  are  sub- 
jected, constitutes  a  very  large  part  of  these  means. 
Every  occurrence  in  life,  which  makes  the  sinner 
reflect  on  the  frail  tenure  of  his  existence,  his  de- 
pendence on  God,  the  evil  of  sin,  and  the  danger  af 
a  wicked  course,  contributes  something  to  the  work 
of  reformation.  Whatever  calms  the  passions,  warms 
the  affections,  exalts  and  purifies  the  character,  or 
promotes  goodness  in  any  way,  has  the  same  tenden- 
cy. Hence  the  advantage  of  preaching  the  word, 
diffusing  a  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures,  and  estab- 
lishing and  supporting  good  institutions;  all  of  which 
would  be  unnecessary,  if  men  are  to  be  regenerated, 
or  brought  into  a  state  of  holiness,  by  the  immediate 
influence,  or  irresistible  impulse  of  divine  power. 
Unitarians  believe,  and  preach,  that  "  without  holi- 
ness no  man  shall  see  the  Lord,"  and  in  consistency 
with  this  belief,  they  exhort  all  men  to  embrace  the 
conditions  of  the  Gospel  by  a  constant  observance  of 
its  laws,  unceasing  piety,  and  rigid  virtue. 

lu  addition  to  what  has  been  said  above,  respect- 
ing the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  following, 
from  a  work  of  high  authority  and  just  celebrity, 
may  probably  be  considered  as  expressing  the  views 
of  Unitarians  generally.  "  They  do  not  reject  the  no- 
tion of  a  direct  and  immediate  influence  of  the  Spirit 
of  God  on  the  human  mind.  They  believe,  that 
there  may  be  circumstances  of  great  trial,  strong- 
temptation,  and  peculiar  difficulty,  that  call  for  extra- 
ordinary assistance,  and  that  those,  who  have  mani- 


312  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

fested  a  disposition  to  make  a  good  use  of  the  ordina- 
ry means  afforded,  will  have  further  aid  suited  to 
their  exigences,  and  sufficient  by  a  proper  use  to 
answer  to  their  necessities.  They  suppose,  also,  that 
extraordinary  assistance  will  be  granted  only  to  those, 
who  ask  it;  that  it  will  be  granted  to  previous  good 
disposition,  and  a  sense  of  need  and  dependence, — 
that  God  will  give  the  Holy  Spirit  to  them  who  ask, 
to  them  who  have  already  right  feelings,  are  sensible 
of  their  weakness  and  wants,  and  ask  the  mercy  of 
God  to  supply  them."* 

From  what  has  been  said,  it  is  to  be  inferred  that 
Unitarians  differ  from  Calvinists  not  in  the  object  to 
be  attained  by  conversion,  but  respecting  the  man- 
ner by  which  it  is  attained.  Unitarians  hold  to  a  di- 
vine influence,  and  that  men  are  converted  by  this  m- 
fluence,  but  they  do  not  believe  it  to  be  irresistible, 
or  miraculous.  They  conceive  that  God  is  always 
ready  to  second  their  good  intentions  and  purposes,  to 
aid  their  virtuous  efforts,  listen  to  their  prayers,  show 
mercy  to  the  penitent,  and  to  pardon  their  sins  when 
repented  of  and  forsaken.  They  believe  conversion 
to  be  the  work  of  God,  not  in  the  way  of  an  arbitra- 
ry, irresistible  agency,  but  by  the  innumerable  mo- 
tives and  inducements,  which  he  employs  to  bring 
men  to  a  just  sense  of  their  duty,  a  deep  reverence 
of  his  character,  love  of  his  laws,  and  a  habitual  de- 
sire for  purity  of  mind,  and  holiness  of  life.  What- 
ever leads  to  these  results,  may  be  considered  as  pro- 

*  Dr.  Ware's  Address  to  Trinitarians  and  Calvinists,  p.  V24, 


liET.  n.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  3l3 

ceeding  froni  the  Spirit  of  God.  This  Spirit  may 
operate  through  good  instructions,  or  any  thing,  in 
fact,  which  disposes  the  mind  to  thoughtfulncss  and 
serious  inquiry.  Sudden  and  deep  afflictions,  an  im- 
pressive sermon,  certain  passages  in  the  word  of  God, 
may,  by  the  agency  of  the  divine  Spirit,  be  brought 
down  upon  the  soul  with  a  power,  which  will  termi- 
nate in  conversion,  by  opening  the  eyes  of  men  to 
their  true  character,  and  causing  them  to  see  the  folly 
and  danger  of  sin.  But  in  these  operations,  there  is 
no  force  nor  compulsion;  nothing  which  may  not  be 
resisted,  and  Avhich  is  not  resisted  by  all,  who,  under 
the  same  circumstances,  receive  no  impression. 

This  is  consistent  with  the  scripture  view  of  the  sub- 
ject. Conversion  is  never  represented  there  as  coming 
from  an  irresistible  act  of  divine  powder,  or  as  being 
brought  about  in  consequence  of  a  divine  decree.  We 
are  told  "  grieve  not  the  Spirit  of  God."  But  why 
thus  told,  unless  the  Spirit  may  be  grieved,  or  resist- 
ed ?  "  Repent  ye,  therefore,  and  be  converted,"  says 
the  Apostle.  But  why  this  command,  if  we  have 
not  power  to  obey  it,  and  are  to  he  passive,  till  it  shall 
please  God  to  raise  us  up  by  a  miracle  ?  St.  Paul's 
conversion  was  miraculous,  and  is  the  most  remarka- 
ble one  recorded  in  scripture,  and  yet,  in  his  speech 
before  Agrippa,  he  says,  that  he  "  was  not  disobedi- 
ent to  the  heavenly  vision,"  intimating,  as  a  learned 
writer  has  observed,  that  his  freedom  of  choice  was 
not  restrained,  but  that  his  conversion  was  on  his 
part  an  act  of  voluntary  obedience  and  virtue. 

Such  are  the  comparative  views  of  the  doctrine  o£ 
40 


314  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  it. 

conversion,  or  regeneration,  as  held  by  Calvinists  and 
Unitarians.  Which  are  the  most  rational  and  scrip- 
tural, which  the  most  likely  to  secure  good  morals 
and  christian  piety,  let  the  impartial  and  reflecting 
judge. 


LETTER  III. 


Calvinistic  Doctrines  of  Election,  Particular  Redemp- 
tion, and  Perseverance,  as  influencing  Piety  and 
Morals. 

SIR, 

The  doctrine  of  divine  decrees,  in  point  of  order 
and  dignity,  is  the  first  in  the  calvinistic  circle.  That 
"  God  from  all  eternity  ordained  whatsoever  comes 
to  pass,"  is  the  primary  article  in  Calvin's  creed,  and 
I  suppose  in  the  creed  of  all  his  true  followers.  It  is 
the  groundwork  of  this  system,  that  the  predetermi- 
nation, or  arbitrary  appointment,  of  the  Creator,  ex- 
tends to  every  event  and  change,  which  could  possi- 
bly take  place  either  in  the  physical  or  moral  crea- 
tion. 

At  present  I  am  only  to  remark  on  that  branch 
of  this  doctrine,  known  by  the  popular  name  of 
election,  or  predestination,  and  which  relates  to  the 
destiny  of  man.  According  to  Calvinism,  God  deter- 
mined from  the  beginning  to  create  man  Avith  such 


LET.  III.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  315 

infirmities,  and  expose  him  to  such  trials,  that  he 
should  bj  divine  appointment  become  a  being  totally 
depraved,  or  infinitely  wicked,  cherishing  an  irrecon- 
cilable enmity  to  his  Maker,  without  either  the  dis- 
position or  the  power  to  return  to  obedience  and  ho- 
liness. This  was  a  general  decree,  reaching  to  all 
mankind.  How  then  could  any  be  restored  to  di- 
vine favour,  which  all  had  forfeited  by  the  necessary 
conditions  of  existence  ?  How  could  any  be  saved '? 
This  was  brought  about  by  another  determination  of 
the  supreme  will,  called  the  decree  of  election,  by 
which  it  was  ordained,  that  a  certain  number  of  the 
human  race  should  be  released  from  the  bondage 
imposed  on  them  by  the  general  decree,  and  be  made 
the  children  of  God's  mercy  forever.  This  doctrine 
is  so  clearly  expressed  by  its  asserters,  that  no  lan- 
guage can  render  it  better  understood  than  their 
own. 

Calvin  speaks  as  follows.  "  Predestination  we  call 
the  eternal  decree  of  God,  by  which  he  hath  deter- 
mined in  himself,  what  he  would  have  become  of 
every  individual  of  mankind."*  And  he  adds  imme- 
diately after  ;  "  They  are  not  all  created  with  an 
equal  condition,  but  to  some  eternal  life  is  fore- 
dained,  and  to  others  eternal  damnation.  Since, 
therefore,  every  man  is  destined  to  one  or  the  other 
of  these  ends,  we  say  he  is  predestinated  either 
to  life  or  to  death."t     The  members  of  the  West- 


*  Instil.  B.III.  Chap.  XXI.  }  5. 

t  Non  enim  pari  conditione  creantur  omnes  ;  sed  aliis  vita  aeteina,  alii* 
damnatio  aetenia  piaeordinatur.  Itaque,  piout  in  alterutrum  finem  quisque 
conditus  est,  ita  vel  ad  vitam,  vel  ad  mortem  praedestinatum  dicimus.     Ibid, 


Mi)  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CAT  VIiMSM.  [PAUT  iv. 

minster  A<-:':embly  were  even  more  explicit.  ''  By 
the  decree  of  God,"  say  they,  "for  the  manifestation 
of  his  glory,  some  men  and  angels  are  predestinated 
unto  everlasting  life,  and  others  foreordained  to  ever- 
lasting death. — Neither  are  any  others  redeemed  by 
Christ,  elTectually  called,  justified,  adopted,  sanctified, 
and  saved,  but  the  elect  only  ;  the  rest  of  mankind 
God  was  pleased,  according  to  the  unsearchable 
counsel  of  his  own  will,  to  pass  by,  and  to  ordain  them 
to  dishonour  and  WTath  for  their  sin,  to  the  praise  of 
his  glorious  justice."*  And  to  show,  that  this  pre- 
destination originated  wholly  in  the  arbitrary  will  of 
the  Deity,  without  regard  to  the  actions  or  goodness 
of  the  beings  to  whom  it  applies,  we  are  assured,  that 
the  election  was  established  "  without  any  foresight 
of  faith,  or  good  works,  or  perseverance  in  either  of 
them,  or  any  other  thing  in  the  creature,  as  condi- 
tions, or  causes  moving  him  thereunto."t 

Such  is  the  leading  tenet  of  Calvinism  ;  all  man- 
kind arc  totally  depraved,  and  naturally  under  God's 
w^rath  and  curse  ;  they  can  only  be  rescued  by  the 
atoning  sacrifice  of  Christ  ;  and  this  sacrifice,  although 
made  by  an  "  Ahni^htij  surety,'^  is  sufficient  for  the 
elect  only.  This  is  the  essence  of  Calvinism  ;  take 
away  election,  and  there  is  no  certainty  that  any  will 
be  saved ;  take  this  away,  and  Calvinism  falls  to  the 
ground;  I  mean  that  Calvinism,  which  Calvin  preach- 
ed, which  is  set  forth  in  the  Confession  of  Faith,  and 
adopted  by  the  Presbyterian  Church. 


*  Confession  of  Faith,  Chap.  III.  ^  3,  6.  7. 


i.ET.  III.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  317 

Without  saying  one  word  concerning  the  truth  of 
this  doctrine,  let  us  turn  our  thoughts  for  a  moment 
to  its  characteristics  and  tendency.  In  what  light 
does  it  represent  the  Deity?  And  what  encourage- 
ment does  it  aiford  to  piety,  love  and  obedience  in 
men?  The  answer  to  these  questions  is  so  extreme- 
ly obvious,  that  a  few  short  hints  will  be  sufficient. 

In  the  first  place,  it  takes  away  every  vestige  of 
the  divine  goodness,  which  is  the  fountain  of  all  the 
moral  attributes  in  God,  as  well  as  the  primary  cause 
of  the  moral  nature  and  duties  of  man.  That  God  is 
no  respecter  of  persons,  but  regards  all  his  creatures 
with  the  same  parental  tenderness,  is  the  great  cause 
why  they  owe  him  submission,  gratitude,  praise,  and 
devotion.  The  scheme  of  predestination  annihilates 
this  holiest  of  his  attributes,  and  clothes  him  with 
the  habiliments  of  a  partial,  capricious  Being,  a  re- 
specter of  persons,  showering  blessings  on  a  certain 
selected  portion  of  his  creatures,  and  entailing  end- 
less misery  on  the  rest,  without  reference  to  any 
thing  they  have  done,  or  could  do.  Light  and  dark- 
ness are  not  more  opposite,  than  are  the  traits  of 
such  a  character  to  the  perfections  of  a  God  of  in- 
finite goodness. 

Again,  if  God  creates  wicked  natures  in  men,  or 
what  is  precisely  the  same  thing,  if  he  so  creates 
men  that  they  are  obliged  to  sin,  or  decrees  from 
all  eternity  that  they  shall  sin,  and  then  punishes 
them  for  their  guilt,  he  becomes  literally  the  author 
of  sin,  and  inflicts  punishments  for  deeds,  which  he 
made  it  necessary  to  commit.     If  men  are  reprobate 


318  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  lpakt  iv. 

by  the  appointment  of  God,  they  are  so  by  a  law, 
which  it  would  be  rebellion  in  them  to  resist ;  and 
if  he  has  decreed,  that  all  their  thoughts  and  ac- 
tions shall  be  wicked,  they  sin  against  divine  law 
whenever  they  think  a  good  thought,  or  perform  a 
virtuous  act.  This  is  what  is  meant,  I  suppose,  when 
we  are  told,  that  the  prayers  of  the  unregenerate 
are  an  abomination  in  the  sight  of  God.  It  is  be- 
cause he  has  willed,  that  they  shall  be  wicked,  and 
prayer  is  an  attempt  at  holiness  in  opposition  to  his 
will.  This  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the  doctrine, 
and  proves  God  to  be  the  author  of  sin,  although  he 
threatens  a  terrible  punishment  on  the  offender. 

I  know  it  has  been  said  by  some,  who  are  willing 
to  sacrifice  consistency  to  a  show  of  reason,  that  God 
does  not  act  with  compulsion  over  the  nonelect ;  he 
simply  passes  them  by,  and  permits  them  to  be  ruin- 
ed. He  decrees  salvation  to  some,  and  does  not  pre- 
vent the  remainder  from  perishing.  This  sophistry 
is  too  shallow  to  merit  a  serious  reply,  and  only  shows 
the  embarrassments  in  which  the  friends  of  the  doc- 
trine are  involved,  when  they  w^ould  reconcile  it  with 
th€  attributes  of  God,  and  the  common  sense  of  man- 
kind. Calvin  is  more  bold  and  consistent.  He  declares 
that  whom  God  passes  by  he  reprobates ;  quos  Dens 
prueterit  reprobat.  The  divine  will  and  character 
are  equally  concerned  in  the  decree  of  salvation  to 
some,  and  of  perdition  to  others,  and  God  is  just  as 
much  the  author  of  the  sins  by  which  the  wicked  are 
condemned,  as  he  is  of  the  means  by  which  the  righ- 
teous are  saved. 


lET.  III.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  319 

This  schenae,  also,  represents  God  as  acting  an  in- 
sincere part.  He  commands  men  to  obey  his  laws, 
threatens  punishment  to  disobedience,  calls  to  repent- 
ance, and  promises  pardon  to  such  as  will  listen;  and 
all  this  at  the  same  time  that  he  has  foreordained  the 
ruin  of  the  very  creatures  whom  he  thus  endeavours 
to  influence  by  motives  !  Is  it  said,  that  he  speaks  to 
the  elect  only,  in  the  precepts,  admonitions,  com- 
mands, and  encouragements  of  his  word?  This  re- 
moves no  difficulty.  Why  threaten  or  persuade  the 
elect?  Their  destiny  is  fixed,  and  to  threaten  them 
with  punishment  or  proclaim  the  necessity  of  repent- 
ance, is  deception.  The  case  is  aggravated  when 
applied  to  the  reprobate.  To  preach  repentance 
and  a  promise  of  pardon  to  them,  is  not  only  a  cruel 
deception,  but  a  mocking  of  their  wretchedness. 

If  all  acts  and  dispositions  are  decreed,  men  are 
not  moral  agents,  nor  accountable  beings.  Why  then 
should  they  be  judged  by  laws,  which  they  have  no 
power  to  obey  ?  God  has  declared,  that  he  will  judge 
all  men  according  to  their  deeds,  but  such  a  judg- 
ment, on  the  principles  of  election  and  reprobation, 
would  be  an  excess  of  injustice,  a  refinement  of  cruel- 
ty, which  can  be  supposed  to  exist  only  in  a  being, 
Avho  delights  to  practise  evil,  and  inflict  misery. 

With  such  views  of  the  everlasting  God.  as  this 
doctrine  presents  to  us,  where  shall  the  mind  seek 
for  motives  of  piety?  In  alluding  to  this  subject, 
Tillotson  has  well  observed,  that  "  Men  cannot  easi- 
ly have  a  blacker  thought  of  God,  than  to  imagine 
that  he  hath,  from  all  eternity,  carried  on  a  secret 


320  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [rARfi*. 

design  to  circumvent  the  greatest  part  of  men  into 
destruction,  and  underhand  to  draw  men  into  a  plot 
against  heaven,  that  by  this  unworthy  practice  he 
may  raise  a  revenue  of  glory  to  his  justice.  Shall 
we  attribute  that  to  the  best  Being  in  the  world, 
which  we  would  detest  and  abominate  in  ourselves."* 
What  is  left  in  such  a  Being  to  praise,  adore,  love,  or 
imitate  ?  Whoever  would  make  the  notion  of  elec- 
tion and  reprobation  a  ruling  principle  of  his  devo- 
tions, can  have  no  other  feelings  than  those  of  dread 
and  horror  of  a  Being,  who  delights  to  bestow  tor- 
ments and  misery  on  those,  to  whom  he  has  giv- 
en no  ability  to  gain  his  favour,  and  no  power  to 
escape  the  fury  of  his  wrath.  Love  and  reverence 
cannot  mingle  with  such  devotions  ;  never  can  the 
humbled  transgressor  lift  to  heaven  the  eye  of  con- 
trition, and  plead  for  the  mercy  of  a  compassion- 
ate Father;  the  voice  of  praise  will  sound  in  vain, 
and  the  tears  of  penitence  will  flow  unheeded.  Hea- 
ven and  earth,  man  and  nature,  the  past  and  the  fu- 
ture, are  all  bound  in  the  indissoluble  chains  of  desti- 
ny. The  decrees  of  God  are  not  to  be  broken,  and 
he  has  ordained  happiness  to  a  part,  and  wrctched- 

*  Tillotson's  Sermons,  Vol.  VIII,  p.  3408. 

On  another  occasion  Tillotson  says  ; 

"  The  doctrine  of  absolute  reprobation  is  no  part  of  the  doctrine  of  the  ho- 
ly Scriptures,  that  ever  I  could  find;  and  there's  the  rule  of  our  faith.  1; 
some  great  divines  have  held  this  doctrine  not  in  opposition  to  the  goodness  ol 
God,  but  hoping  they  may  be  reconciled  together,  let  them  do  it  if  they  can  ; 
but  if  they  cannot,  rather  let  the  schools  of  the  greatest  divines  be  called  in 
(juestion,  than  the  goodn'^ss  of  God,  which,  next  to  his  being,  is  tlie  greatest 
and  clearest  truth  in  the  world."     Ihid.  J'ol.  VllI,  p,  3564, 


LET.  III.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  321 

ness  to  the  remainder.  Prayers  will  avail  nothing, 
and  why  should  they  be  wasted?  Towards  such  a 
Being,  no  incense  of  piety  can  arise  from  the  virtu- 
ous heart ;  and  if  it  could,  it  would  be  an  unmean- 
ing, vain,  and  useless  oblation. 

It  will  be  seen,  also,  that,  the  doctrine  has  not  a 
better  tendency  to  promote  the  personal  virtues,  and 
regulate  the  conduct  of  men  towards  each  other. 
Whoever  can  summon  so  much  self  assurance  as  to 
rank  himself  among  the  elect,  Avho  are  favoured  of 
God  infinitely  above  the  great  mass  of  his  fellow 
creatures,  must  have  a  stronger  control  over  the  pre- 
dominant feelings  of  human  nature  than  is  generally 
exhibited,  not  sometimes  to  let  his  spiritual  pride 
shoot  above  his  surrounding  virtues,  and  to  look  with 
a  compassion  approaching  contempt  on  the  unfortu- 
nate outcasts,  thus  forever  excluded  from  the  mercy 
of  their  Maker. 

Nor  can  it  be  thought  very  strange  that  such  per- 
sons should  imagine  little  respect,  or  comity,  or  affec- 
tion due  from  them  to  that  degraded  portion  of  their 
race,  whom  God  himself  has  plunged  into  a  gulf  of 
perdition,  even  beyond  the  reach  of  infinite  mercy. 
Would  it  be  the  part  of  duty,  nay,  would  it  not  be  an 
indignity  to  the  great  .Jehovah,  to  regard  Avith  com- 
placency the  beings  on  whom  he  has  denounced 
an  irrevocable  curse  ?  Such  must  certainly  be  the 
feelings  of  a  person,  who  believes  he  has  been  re- 
deemed from  all  iniquity  by  the  merits  of  Christ,  and 
that  much  the  larger  part  of  uianlind  are  reprobates. 
Ought  he  to  love  those,  whom  God  will  never  love, 
41 


322  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

but  has  consio^ned  to  torments  unutterable  and  unex- 
tinguishable  f  It  is  presumed,  that  most  of  those  who 
sincerely  believe  this  doctrine,  as  sincerely  believe 
themselves  to  be  among  the  chosen  few,  the  only  ac- 
cepted ;  but  the  records  of  passing  events  will  testify 
that  the  number  is  not  small,  who  have  been  driven 
to  distraction  with  the  haunting  fear  that  they  were 
not  among  the  elect,  and  ended  their  days  by  their 
own  hands,  the  miserable  victims  of  delusion  and  de- 
spair. In  either  of  the  above  results,  this  doctrine 
proves  itself  a  treacherous  guardian  of  morals  and 
christian  duty. 

Besides,  what  has  the  sinner  to  fear  ?  If  he  be- 
lieves his  sins  to  be  predetermined,  and  acts  accord- 
ing to  this  faith,  he  will  consider  sin  as  much  a  duty, 
as  any  virtuous  act.  To  do  what  God  requires,  is  a 
duty  of  the  highest  obligation  ;  and  let  men  once  be 
persuaded,  that  all  thoughts  and  acts  are  duties,  be- 
cause decreed,  or  that  no  course  of  action  will  alter 
their  future  destiny,  which  was  fixed  from  eternity, 
and  we  shall  have  no  occasion  to  ask  how  it  will  af- 
fect the  state  of  morals.  Yet,  let  it  be  repeated,  the 
doctrine  of  election  and  reprobation,  carried  into 
practice,  will  leave  the  sinner  at  liberty  to  follow  his 
worst  inclinations  under  a  belief,  that  he  is  in  the 
way  of  his  duty,  and  doing  all  to  the  glory  of  God. 

In  the  tendency  of  this  point  of  orthodoxy  to  ex- 
cite high  thoughts  of  one's  self,  and  low  thoughts  of 
one's  brethren,  it  may  be  we  have  revealed  to  us  the 
reason  why  some  christians  arrogate  so  much  to 
themselves,  raise  so  high  the  tone  of  authority,  claim 


LET.  in.]      MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.        323 

the  praise  of  peculiar  strictness  and  sanctity,  talk  ma- 
gisterially of  the  essentials  of  religion,  place  them- 
selves m  the  judgment  seat,  and  assume  the  preroga- 
tive of  their  Master,  in  deciding  who  are  and  who 
are  not  christians;  I  say,  it  may  be,  that  conduct  like 
this  is  no  more  than  the  natural  effect  of  a  conscious- 
ness of  being  one  of  the  elect,  and  of  being  thus  qua- 
lified to  take  the  work  of  the  Saviour  out  of  his 
hands,  and  to  go  about  the  invidious  task  of  separat- 
ing the  wheat  from  the  tares,  the  sheep  from  the 
goats;  for  it  is  difficult  to  realize  how  any  one,  who 
looks  upon  himself  as  fallible  like  other  mortals,  and 
as  formed  in  the  same  mould  of  humanity,  could  give 
way  to  such  a  spirit,  or  suffer  himself  to  be  deluded 
into  assumptions  so  extravagant.  Whether  this  con- 
jecture be  well  founded  or  not,  it  will  not  be  denied, 
that  a  very  intimate  connexion  apparently  exists  be- 
tween such  a  faith  and  such  a  conduct ;  and  a  very 
little  inquiry  will  be  enough  to  make  it  manifest,  that 
this  has  often  been  something  more  than  a  seeming 
alliance.  Ail  this  may  be  true,  perhaps,  and  still  no 
just  reflections  can  be  cast  on  persons,  but  on  princi- 
ples. It  is  hard  if  a  man  cannot  be  permitted  to  act 
up  to  his  faith.  Certainly  it  is,  but  then  he  must  be 
responsible  for  the  lengths  to  which  his  faith  leads 
him,  especially  if  he  is  driven  to  overleap  the  bounds 
of  decorum,  charity,  and  the  commonest  christian 
virtues.  Practical  pnnciples,  or  rather  principles  re- 
duced to  practice,  make  the  character;  and  all  that 
is  asked  of  the  reader  in  the  present  instance  is,  that 
he  will  connect  one  with  the   other,  and  judge  for 


324  MORAL  TE]\DEi\CV  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

himself  whether  the  order  and  harmony  of  things 
be  violated.  Let  not  this  consequence  be  charged  on 
election,  if  it  can  be  ascribed  to  a  more  probable 
cause.* 

We  have  seen,  that  the  doctrine  of  election  is  the 
keystone  of  Calvinism.  It  was  the  great  topic  of 
discussion  at  the  Synod  of  Dort,  and  we  may  per- 
haps say,  it  was  the  sole  cause  of  that  Synod  being 
convened.  The  growing  heresy  of  Arminius  consist- 
ed in  asserting   the  J]'ee  will  of  man,   and   the  Jree 

*  In  the  whole  compass  of  theological  tactics,  there  are  few  things  more  cu- 
rious than  the  twenty-third  Chapter  of  the  third  Book  of  Calvin's  Institutes, 
in  which  he  attempts  to  confute  the  objections,  or  as  he  calls  them,  the  "ca- 
lumnies," against  the  doctrine  of  election.  The  objections  are  generally 
stated  by  him  with  considerable  fairness,  but  in  his  replies,  he  indulges  to  an  un- 
common degree  his  usual  lestiness  and  ill  humour.  Where  he  has  not  a  good 
argument  at  hand,  he  never  fails  to  be  ready  with  a  sneer,  a  malediction,  or 
a  copious  discharge  of  hard  names. 

He  finds  it  a  much  easier  matter  to  charge  his  opponents  with  advancing  ar- 
guments "  puerile  and  absurd,"  than  to  undertake  a  demonstration.  Even 
when  he  cannot  argue,  he  can  talk  flippantly  of  the  "  intolerable  petulance  of 
men,"  "the  audaciousness  of  the  impious,"  "the  petulance  and  murmurs  of 
impiety,"  and  will  tell  you  that  his  favourite  doctrine  is  "  maliciously  and  im- 
pudently calumniated."  And  when  this  kind  of  logic  becomes  too  bald  even 
for  himself,  bethinks  all  safe  if  he  can  take  refuge  under  the  wing  of  Augus- 
lin.  The  name  of  this  good  Father  is  his  talisman,  with  which  he  works  won- 
ders unheard  of  before  or  since  in  the  legends  of  scholastic  necromancy. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  give  a  specimen  of  his  reasoning.  He  states  an  ob- 
jection as  follows  ;  "  The  reprobate  wish  to  be  tliought  excusable  in  sinning, 
because  they  cannot  avoid  the  necessity  of  sinning  ;  especially  since  this  neces- 
sity is  laid  upon  them  by  the  ordination  of  God,"  Here  is  an  objection,  that 
goes  to  the  very  bottom  of  his  doctrine.  Observe  how  he  answers  it.  "But  we  de- 
ny this  to  be  a  just  excuse  ;  because  the  ordination  of  God,  by  which  they  com- 
plain that  they  are  destined  to  destruction,  is  guided  by  equity,  unkitoivn  in- 
deed to  us,  but  indubitably  certain,"  Inshtutes,  B.  iii,  C  xxiii.  }  9.  Here 
he  huilde  his  whole  argument  upon  a  thing  which  he  acknowledges  to  be  "  un- 
known," but  which  is,  nevertheless,  "  indubitably  certain."  A  more  palpable 
and  illustiious  example  ol  the  ar^umentum  bacuUnwn  could  jiot  have  been 
devised  by  Peter  Ramus  himself. 


tBT.  III.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  325 

grace  of  God,  in  opposition  to  the  notion  of  an  abso- 
lute predestination.  In  this  heresy  the  Calvinists 
saw  the  ruin  of  their  whole  fabric.  Hence  the^'ye 
•points^  estabhshed  by  a  vote  of  the  Synod  of  Dort ; 
which  may  all  be  resolved  into  the  one  point  of  elec- 
tion,  for  this  is  the  beginning  and  the  end,  the  form 
and  the  substance  of  all  the  others. 

Since  this  is  so  vital  a  doctrine  in  the  calvinistic 
faith,  it  is  surely  a  little  surprising,  that  not  a  glimpse 
of  it  is  discovered  in  your  Sermon  and  Reply  ;  nor  is 
it  even  hinted  at  in  your  repeated  enumerations  of 
c5A'e/?//«/ doctrines.  If  there  be  an  article  of  beHef 
more  essential  than  any  other,  in  the  system  which 
you  defend,  it  is  this  ;  if  there  be  one,  the  denial  of 
which  should  be  a  forfeiture  of  the  christian  name  in 
the  mind  of  a  consistent  Calvinist,  it  is  this  ;  for  it  is 
the  supporting  pillar  of  the  calvinistic  scheme  of 
Christianity.  How  it  should  so  completely  escape 
your  notice,  at  a  time  when  it  would  seem  to  claim 
the  very  first  place,  it  might  be  fruitless  to  inquire. 

Did  this  neglect  arise  from  accident,  oversight,  or 
a  reluctance  to  enforce  a  tenet,  Avhichhas  become  so 


He  brings  forward  as  another  objection,  which  is  urged  against  predestina- 
tion, that  if  the  fate  of  men  is  fixed  by  an  immutable  decree,  they  can  have  no 
room  for  solicitude  about  their  conduct  in  this  life.  To  this  he  replies,  "And 
truly  this  objection  is  not  altogether  destitute  of  truth  ;  for  there  are  many 
swine,  who  bespatter  the  doctrine  of  predestination  with  these  impure  blas- 
phemies, and  with  this  pretext  elude  all  admonitions  and  reproofs."  And 
again;  "  They  carry  their  blasphemies  much  fartlier,  by  asserting,  that  any 
one  who  is  reprobated  by  God  will  labour  to  no  purpose,  if  he  endeavour  to 
approve  himself  to  him  by  innocence  and  integrity  of  life  ;  but  here  they  are 
fonvicted  of  a  most  impudent  falsehood."  Jbid.  ij  12.  This  language  Calvin 
calls  argument. 


326  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [rAKf  iv. 

unpopular  as  not  to  be  readily  received  ?  It  is  no  un- 
common thing,  indeed,  for  professed  Calvinists  to  de- 
clare themselves  much  aggrieved,  when  this  doctrine 
is  reckoned  among  the  articles  of  their  faith.  This 
is  a  good  omen.  It  testifies  to  the  progress  of  truth, 
and  the  inefficiency  of  all  human  inventions  which 
do  violence  to  the  understanding  of  men.  When  a 
professor  in  one  Calvinistic  Theological  Seminary  re- 
jects the  doctrine  of  imputed  sin*  and  a  professor  in 
another  thinks  it  prudent  to  keep  out  of  sight  the 
most  important  tenet  of  his  faith,  there  is  much  good 
ground  for  hope,  that  the  light  of  truth,  which  is 
thus  breaking  out  of  darkness,  will  continue  to  mul- 
tiply and  extend  its  beams.t 

*  Professor  Woods,  of  Andover,  says,  "  The  imputation  of  Adarns  sin  to 
his  posterity,  in  any  sense,  which  those  words  naturally  and  properly  convey, 
is  a  doctrine,  which  tve  do  not  believe."  But  listen  to  the  Assembly  of  Di- 
vines.— "Our  first  parents  being  the  root  of  all  mankind,  the  guilt  of  their 
sin  was  imputed,  and  the  same  death  in  sin  and  corrupted  nature  conveyed  to 
all  their  posterity.''''  Confession  of  Faith,  Chap.  vi.  It  cannot  be  denied,  that 
the  An.iover  School  has  greatly  improved  upon  this  doctrine. 

+  It  is  very  true,  the  founders  of  the  Princeton  Seminary  have  done  what 
they  could  to  guard  against  any  such  consequence.  They  have  raised  as 
strong  barriers  as  possible  against  everything  like  improvement,  and  closed 
most  eftectually  every  opening  thiough  which  a  single  additional  ray  of  light 
could  penetrate.  The  Tlu'ological  ProJcssor,  when  he  enters  on  l^is  duties,  it 
seems,  is  obliged  to  subscribe  the  following  declaration,  namely,  "  I  do  solemn- 
ly promise  and  engage,  not  to  inculcate,  teach,  or  insinuate,  any  thing  which 
shall  appear  to  me  to  contradict  or  contravene,  either  directly  or  impliedly, 
any  thing  taught  in  the  Confession  of  Faith,  or  Catechisms  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church."  Assembly  s  Digest,  p.  247.  A  professor  at  Princeton,  therefore, 
can  never  change  his  mind  in  regard  to  any  of  his  theological  sentiments,  with- 
out a  hypocritical  conceahncnl  of  his  opinions,  or  a  violation  of  his  oath,  in 
"teaching,  inculcating,  or  insinuating"  somrthing,  which  he  did  not  originally 
believe.  This  is  the  genuine  spirit  of  the  dark  ages,  and  the  most  sagacious 
scheme  that  could  be  devised  to  perpetuate  ignorance  and  error. 


LET.  III.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM,  327 

Two  more  points  of  Calvinism  still  remain,  but  so 
intimately  connected  with  election,  and  their  moral 
tendency  so  nearly  the  same,  that  little  needs  be  add- 
ed concerning  them. 

The  first  of  these  is  particular  redemption,  which 
teaches  that  Christ  died  for  a  specified  number  of 
the  human  race,  and  that  the  efficacy  of  his  redeem- 
ing power  could  extend  only  to  this  elect  number. 
After  the  decree  of  reprobation,  it  is  certain,  that 
none  coming  under  this  decree  could  be  saved ;  but 
how  it  happens,  that  Christ,  whose  sacrifice  was  in- 
finite, should  not  have  power  to  redeem  all  mankind, 
or  how  it  happens,  that  an  infinite  sacrifice  should 
not  embrace  them  all,  has  never  been  explained. 
Divines  tell  us  of  a  covenant  ;  but  they  have  never 
proved,  that  the  goodness  of  God  was  extinct,  or  that 
there  ever  was  a  time,  when  he  loved  a  certain  por- 
tion of  his  creatures,  and  hated  all  the  rest ;  which 
they  must  prove,  before  they  can  make  this  notion 
of  particular  redemption  intelligible.  We  are  not 
now  concerned,  however,  with  any  thing  more  than 
the  doctrine  itself,  as  held  by  the  Calvinists.  Into  its 
reasons  we  shall  not  inquire.  Let  it  suffice,  that  it  con- 
siders every  thing,  which  Christ  has  taught  and  done, 
his  instructions,  revelations,  death,  and  sufferings,  as 
having  no  value  for  any  other  persons  than  the  elect. 

All  the  remaining  portion  of  mankind  are  in  the 
same  condition,  as  if  he  had  never  come  into  the 
world,  nor  taken  on  him  the  office  of  a  redeemer. 

If  this  be  true,  no  benefit  has  resulted  from  the 
mission  of  Christ.     The  elect    were  already  saved 


328  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

by  a  divine  decree,  and  if  he  came  only  for  their  ad- 
vantage, he  accomph'shed  nothing. 

Since  the  coming  of  Christ  has  not  altered  the  con- 
dition of  men,  nor  provided  a  method  by  which  it 
can  be  altered,  why  should  any  believe  in  him  as  a 
redeemer  and  Saviour  ?  In  fact,  such  a  faith  would 
be  false.  If  salvation  has  been  decreed  to  the  elect, 
he  is  no  Saviour  to  them;  and  to  the  reprobate  he  is 
not  a  Saviour,  for  they  cannot  be  saved.  Where  will 
this  end,  but  in  the  destruction  of  the  Gospel  system, 
and  of  every  motive  to  holiness  which  it  supplies  ? 

The  doctrine  of  perseverance  assures  us,  that  the 
elect,  after  they  have  been  visited  by  the  efficacious 
and  regenerating  grace  of  God  made  certain  by  a  de- 
cree, will  never  lose  this  grace,  nor  be  in  danger  of 
so  far  deviating  from  the  way  of  holiness  as  to  put 
their  salvation  in  jeopardy.  They  must  be  saved  in 
defiance  of  themselves.  This  is  no  more  than  a 
consequence  of  election,  and  has  the  same  ruinous 
tendency  on  morals  and  religious  obligation. 

What  has  the  regenerate  man  to  do,  but  yield 
without  compunction  to  any  wickedness  to  Avhich  his 
concupiscence,  avarice,  malice,  or  othei-  passions  and 
propensities  shall  prompt  him?  If  conscience  chides, 
what  power  will  consciciicc  have,  while  he  is  sure, 
that  no  evil  can  befal  him  at  last?  He  is  elected,  and 
the  God  of  heaven  will  not  circumvent  his  own  de- 
termined purpose.  Sin  and  holiness  are  the  same  to 
a  man,  who  is  among  the  elect;  they  will  equally 
carry  him  through,  and  make  him  an  instrument  in 


LET.  m.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  329 

aiding  the  designs  of  providence,  and  advancing  the 
glory  of  God. 

Again,  in  this  course  of  perseverance,  what  concern 
have  the  elect  with  rules  of  action,  principles  of  mo- 
rals, the  laws  of  society,  and  those  wholesome  re- 
straints imposed  to  keep  up  harmony  and  peace  among 
men?  As  far  as  these  redound  to  their  convenience, 
it  may  be  thought  advisable  to  regard  them,  but  no 
farther  ;  and  not  even  to  this  extent  from  any  sense 
of  moral  obligation.  Men  may  form  systems  of  eth- 
ics, talk  of  virtue,  construct  wise  laws,  confide  in  the 
moral  sense,  and  thus  hope  to  curb  the  licentious  and 
passionate  ;  but  all  these  will  be  shadowy  things  in 
the  eyes  of  the  elect.  They  are  under  a  law  supe- 
riour  to  any  human  fabrication  ;  they  are  shielded  by 
the  promise  and  power  of  God;  they  have  a  more 
dignified  calling  than  the  mass  of  groveling  mortals; 
they  are  chosen  vessels,  never  to  be  broken ;  children 
of  light;  heirs  of  an  inheritance,  which  no  changes 
of  time  or  of  eternity  can  render  uncertain. 

We  need  not  stop  with  the  laws  of  men,  and  hu- 
man principles  of  right  and  goodness.  In  what  re- 
spect are  such  favoured  beings  concerned  with  the 
laws  of  God,  the  precepts  of  scripture,  the  com- 
mands of  Christ?  The  decree  of  jjerseverance hai>  no 
conditions.  It  is  not  said,  be  humble,  repent,  obey, 
love  God,  love  your  neighbour,  and  then  you  will  be 
able  to  persevere.  It  is  a  main  part  of  the  scheme, 
that  it  is  not  encumbered  with  conditions.  Hence 
the  Gospel  rules  are  useless,  the  Bible  might  be  blot- 
ted from  existence  without  loss  to  the  elect;  and  in- 
42 


330  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVliNlSM.  [part  iv. 

deed,  accordiug  to  this  plan,  the  christian  dispensation 
itself  is  only  a  theatrical  exhibition  acted  over  as  it 
Avas  resolved  on  before  the  foundation  of  the  world, 
raising  the  curiosity  and  admiration  of  mortals,  but 
not  producing  any  effect  on  their  character  and  des- 
tiny. 

I  have  dwelt  on  this  topic  longer  than  its  real  im- 
portance demands  :  The  individuals  are  very  few  at 
this  period,  who  believe  in  the  calvinistic  doctrine  of 
election,  as  contained  in  creeds,  and  taught  by  school 
divines;  and  the  number  is  vastly  smaller,  who  would 
undertake  to  defend  it  on  its  original  grounds.  It 
comes  out  of  the  hands  of  later  writers  modified, 
softened,  and  moulded  into  such  shapes,  as  would 
never  be  recognized  by  the  warm  divines,  who  plead- 
ed its  cause  so  manfully  at  the  Synod  of  Dort.  They 
would  see  only  the  caricature  of  its  former  glory,  and 
be  grieved,  that  it  should  suffer  more  from  the  treach- 
ery of  friends,  than  it  would  have  done  in  their  day 
from  the  open  hostility  of  enemies.  The  truth  is,  it 
will  not  bear  softening ;  to  modify,  is  to  destroy  it  ; 
whoever  applies  himself  to  this  task,  deserts  the  field 
of  Calvinism  ;  he  may  retain  the  name,  but  he  has 
nothing  else  ;  let  him  remove  this  one  stone,  and  his 
tower  of  strength  is  fallen ;  he  may  feed  his  eyes 
with  the  vision  of  its  former  grandeur,  but  it  will 
never  again  afford  him  a  resting  place.  A  moderate 
Calvinist  is  no  Calvinist. 

If  the  ingenuity  of  man  were  put  to  its  utmost 
stretch,  I  presume  it  would  be  impossible  to  invent 
another  doctrine  so  perfectly  at  variance  with  the  at- 


LET.  m.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  331 

tributes  of  God,  and  the  reason  of  man,  as  this  of 
election  and  reprobation.  Suppose  the  Deity  to  be 
infinitely  evil,  instead  of  infinitely  good,  and  his  cha- 
racter to  be  in  all  respects  directly  opposite  to  what 
it  really  is,  and  you  might  then  show  a  consistency 
between  this  doctrine,  and  the  attributes  of  his  na- 
ture. However  this  tenet  may  seem  to  others,  I 
cannot  resist  the  conviction,  that  with  its  various  ap- 
pendages and  outworks  of  total  depravity,  human 
inability,  and  compulsory  grace,  it  is  the  most  immo- 
ral and  pernicious,  which  has  ever  been  started  as  a 
doctrine  of  Christianity.  Its  mischief  is  extensive, 
and  that  it  is  not  more  so,  is  because  it  is  never  made 
a  ruling  principle  of  action,  nor  believed  except  in  a 
modified  sense,  and  in  connexion  with  other  doc- 
trines, which  serve  as  a  counterpoise  to  its  pervert- 
ing tendency. 


332  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM,  [part  iv. 

LETTER  IV. 

Testimony  of  History  to  the  Injiucnce  of  Calvinism. 


You  stated  in  your  Sermon,  that  the  positions  you 
had  taken  could  easily  be  illustrated  and  confirmed 
by  tracing  the  histoiy  of  American  Unitarianism. 
You  were  desired  to  trace  this  history,  and  compare 
it  with  a  similar  historical  view  of  Presbyterianism, 
and  let  the  world  see  by  a  fair  parallel  in  what  re- 
spects Unitarians  have  fallen  so  immensely  behind 
their  brethren  in  morals  and  piety,  as  to  be  ranked 
among  Mohammedans  and  Jews,  and  not  to  deserve 
the  name  of  Christians. 

With  this  most  reasonable  request  you  did  not 
think  it  expedient  to  comply.  "  I  do  not  intend," 
you  observe,  "  to  follow  this  gentleman  far,  in  the 
comparison,  which  he  so  zealously  and  confidently 
urges,  between  Presbyterians  and  Unitarians,  on  the 
score  of  purity  of  morals."  That  is,  you  decline  to 
make  the  comparison  by  which  alone  the  accuracy  of 
your  very  serious  charges  can  be  tested.  The  ques- 
tion is,  whether  Unitarians  are  less  moral  as  a  sect, 
than  other  sects.  This  question  must  be  decided,  if 
decided  at  all,  by  facts  and  a  comparison.  You 
have  answered  it  in  the  affirmative,  but  without  proof. 
Those,  who  come  under  your  censure,  do  not  approve 


j,ET.  iv.|  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  333 

the  tribunal  before  which  they  have  been  arraigned, 
and,  as  they  recognize  no  Inquisition,  they  think  it  a 
duty,  and  claim  the  privilege  to  protest  against  your 
decision.  They  believe  you  to  have  gone  on  false 
premises,  and  would  have  you  review  your  ground, 
and  at  all  events  give  the  public  a  detail  of  the  facts 
and  reasons,  by  which  you  felt  yourself  bound  to  re- 
veal to  the  world  the  moral  disability,  the  practical 
irreligion,  and  licentious  habits  of  Unitarians. 

Nothing  more  was  asked,  than  what  you  had  said 
might  easily  be  done,  namely,  to  let  the  voice  of  his- 
tory speak  in  your  behalf.  Turn  to  actual  events, 
and  not  to  speculative  theories,  to  the  moral  condi- 
tion and  progress  of  society,  and  not  to  an  imaginary 
tendency  of  opinions.  Examine  the  history  of  Uni- 
tarianism  with  minuteness  and  severity ;  trace  its  ad- 
vancement through  every  channel ;  bring  to  the  light 
of  open  day  the  secret  mischiefs,  which  it  has  been 
working ;  let  the  lineaments  of  immorality  with 
which  you  aver  it  to  be  so  odiouslj^  disfigured,  be 
exhibited  in  their  boldest  relief  ;  in  short,  give  a  true 
picture,  as  highly  wrought  as  you  please,  and  then 
place  it  by  the  side  of  a  similar  sketch  of  Presbyte- 
rianism,  and  1  venture  to  affirm,  that  no  Unitarian  will 
desire  to  have  his  cause  presented  in  a  more  favour- 
able light,  or  wish  the  public  to  possess  a  better  con- 
futation of  your  charges.  Such  an  examination  is 
the  only  possible  mode  in  which  a  charge  of  practi- 
cal immorality  can  be  substantiated. 

You  not  only  appeal  to  the  records  of  past  times 
as  a  witness  against  Unitarians,  but  call  on  them  to 


334  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  it. 

bear  testimony  to  the  good  effects  of  Calvinism.  You 
express  yourself  in  the  following  language.  "  Now  I 
appeal  to  all  impartial  readers,  who  have  the  least 
knowledge  of  ecclesiastical  history,  whether  those 
v\rho  have  embraced  the  general  system  of  christian 
doctrine,  designated  by  the  name  of  Calvinism,  have 
not  been  in  all  ages  distinguished  as  '  the  stricter  sorf 
of  professmg  christians?  Have  they  not  always  been 
reproached  by  the  laxer  classes  as  'austere,'  '  puri- 
tanical,' and  enemies  of  even  many  '  innocent  indul- 
gencies?'"  An  appeal  so  formal  and  confident  can- 
not be  met  with  more  fairness,  I  presume,  than  by 
bringing  distinctly  before  us  some  of  the  prominent 
particulars  to  which  it  refers.  A  small  number  must 
suffice,  but  they  shall  be  such  as  have  marked  the 
strong  features  of  Calvinism. 

Let  us  begin  with  the  founder  of  this  system. 
What  does  history  report  respecting  the  influence  of 
his  principles  on  his  own  mind,  temper,  and  charac- 
ter ?  Has  there  ever  been  a  more  violent  or  unright- 
eous persecutor  than  Calvin?  What  page  of  history 
is  stained  with  darker  blots,  than  those  which  narrate 
some  of  the  events  of  his  life?  Look  at  his  violent 
abuse  and  cruel  persecutions  of  his  friend  Castalio,  a 
man  of  great  learning,  moderation,  and  piety,  against 
whom  he  uttered  the  grossest  language,  and  procured 
a  decree  of  banishment  for  no  other  reason,  than  that 
he  had  the  indey^endence  to  assert  and  maintain  opi- 
nions, which  differed  from  his  own.  The  unfortu- 
nate, though  less  worthy,  Bolscc  shared  a  similar  fate. 
Every  one,  indeed,  who  presumed  to  doubt  his  infal- 


LET.  IV.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  335 

libili ty,  whether  friend  or  foe,  was  made  to  feel  the 
effects  of  his  turbulent  passions.  But  the  darkest 
and  deepest  stigma  on  his  character,  was  his  treat- 
ment of  Servetus,  and  it  is  one,  which  his  ardent  ad- 
mirers have  laboured  with  total  want  of  success  to 
remove,  or  even  to  diminish.  Servetus  had  for  many 
years  been  his  confidential  friend  and  correspondent. 
He  could  not  subscribe  the  creed  of  Calvin,  and  as 
Calvin  could  not  convince  him  by  argument  and  per- 
suasion, he  resorted  to  stronger  means.  He  accused 
him  of  heresy,  procured  his  imprisonment,  commenc- 
ed against  him  a  criminal  process,  and  was  thus  the 
original  and  chief  cause  of  his  sentence  of  death,  and 
his  murder  at  the  stake.  He  afterwards  declared 
his  warmest  approbation  of  this  event  in  letters  to 
his  friends,  and  expressed  himself  in  the  most  intem- 
perate language.  Even  in  his  commentaries  on  the 
Bible,  he  calls  Servetus  a  "  profligate  fellow,  a  knave, 
and  an  obscene  dog."* 


*  Tlie  rage  of  Calvin  seems  first  to  have  been  excited  on  account  of  certain 
questions  in  theology,  which  Servetus  had  proposed  to  him,  but  which  Calvin 
did  not  answer  to  his  satisfaction.  Calvin  could  not  bear  opposition,  and 
Servetus  was  not  to  be  convinced  without  a  reason.  One  of  the  unworthy  acts 
of  Calvin  in  procuring  his  condemnation,  was  the  producing  of  a  manuscript 
at  his  trial,  which  Servetus  had  sent  to  him  long  before  for  his  examination  and 
judgment,  hut  which  had  never  been  printed. 

To  show  the  spirit  with  which  he  meditated  and  prosecuted  this  business,  it 
is  enough  to  quote  what  he  said  in  a  letter,  which  Bolsec  and  Grotius  saw  in 
the  original,  "that  if  this  heretic  should  fall  into  his  hands,  he  would  order  it 
so,  that  it  should  cost  him  his  life."  And  after  the  unholy  act  was  done,  he 
boasted  of  "having  exterminated  Michael  Servetus  the  Spaniard." 

The  authority  for  these  facts,  and  others  equally  disgraceful,  may  be  seen 
in  a  very  circumstantial  and  interesting  account  of  the  life,  writings,  and 
death  of  Servetus,  contained  in  the  Monthlif  Repository,  vol,  i.  and  v.  See 
also  the  Cambridge  General  Repositorij,  vol.  iii. ;  Wright's  History  of  Perse 
tutionSf  p.  345  ;  Mosheim^  vol.  iv.  p.  433,  488. 


336  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  it. 

Such  was  the  character  of  hlra,  who  first  matured 
and  embodied  the  doctrines,  which  now  go  under  his 
name.  Do  these  historical  facts  argue  much  in  fa- 
vour of  the  moral  tendency  of  the  principles  you  de- 
fend ?  Calvin  was  the  more  inexcusable,  as  he  had 
himself  deserted  the  church  of  Rome,  and  professed 
to  be  an  advocate  for  free  inquiry.  It  is  certainly 
unfortunate  for  your  appeal  to  history,  that  few 
names  have  descended  to  posterity,  bearing  feebler 
testimony  of  the  persons  to  whom  they  belonged 
having  been  under  the  purifying  influence  of  religious 
principles,  than  that  of  Calvin. 

The  commotions  in  Holland,  which  preceded  and 
followed  the  Synod  of  Dort,  and  which  brought  the 
virtuous  and  inflexible  patriot,  Oldenbarneveldt,  to 
the  block,  and  consigned  the  illustrious  Grotius  to 
perpetual  imprisonment,  were  excited  by  the  Calvi- 
nists.  The  spirit  of  intolerance,  which  arose  to  so 
fervent  a  heat  in  Calvin,  raged  at  this  period  with 
scarcely  less  violence  in  his  followers.  The  Armi- 
nians  had  struck  out  of  their  creed  the  doctrine  of 
absolute  decrees,  because  they  could  neither  find  it 
in  the  Scriptures,  nor  believe  it.  This  was  the  of- 
fence that  kindled  a  flame  of  persecution  in  the  Cal- 
vinists,  which  lasted  for  years,  drove  many  of  the 
Arminians  into  exile,  immured  others  in  prisons,  si- 
lenced their  preachers,  suppressed  their  religious  as- 
semblies, and  inflicted  universally  every  species  of  se- 
verity. Even  at  the  Synod  of  Dort,  which  was  pre- 
tended to  be  summoned  for  the  purpose  of  a  mutual 
conference,  the  Arminians  were  treated  as  heretics, 


LET.  IV.].  MORAL  TENDElSrCY  OF-CAL'VINISM.  337 

and  rudely  denied  the  privilege  of  explaining  and  de- 
fending their  sentiments.  They  were  dealt  with  as 
criminals,  and  condemned  as  such. 

The  history  of  Holland  during  these  disastrous 
times  affords  the  most  striking  illustration  of  the  influ- 
ence of  calvinistic  principles,  when  allowed  to  act 
without  opposition.  The  Calvinists  were  the  strong- 
er party  ;  they  professed  to  act  wholly  from  mo- 
tives of  religion  ;  and  all  the  enormities  practised  on 
their  opponents  are  justly  ascribed  to  this  source.* 

It  will  not  be  easy,  perhaps,  to  trace  the  effects  of 
Calvinism  with  much  precision  in  England.  Civil  and 
religious  causes  have  been  so  much  blended  in  that 
country  since  the  origin  of  Calvinism,  as  to  render  it 
a  difficult  task  to  distinguish  between  them.  What 
with  the  puritans,  the  favourers  of  the  English  Pre- 
lacy, and  of  Papacy,  during  the  high  commotions  of 
church  and  state,  it  is  impossible  to  tell  how  much 
should  be  put  to  the  account  of  selfishness,  party 
zeal,  bigotry,  the  tendency  of  bad  principles,  or  of 
a  correct  faith,  and  genuine  piety.  One  thing,  how- 
ever, amidst  this  chaos  of  uncertainty,  stands  forth 
prominent  and  indisputable.  When  the  Calvinists 
had  dominion,  they  showed  a  spirit  of  intolerance  not 
a  whit  inferior  to  that  of  their  Genevan  master,  or 
their  brethren  at  Dort.  Witness  the  ordinance  of 
the  Presbyterian  parliament  against  heresy,  in  which 

*  See  MosheirrCs  Church  History,  vol.  v.  chap.  3.  iN'orth  American  Re- 
view, vol,  vi.  p.  185.  Oldenbarneveldt  opposed  the  convocation  of  the  S)'nod 
of  Dort,  and  maintained,  that  the  States-General  had  no  authority  on  matters 
"if  religion.     Sro  Marlaints  A'c/e  in  Mn.ihrim's  Hi^lnrj/.  vol.  v.  p,  451. 

43 


338  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [rART  iv. 

it  was  decreed,  that  any  one,  who  should  be  guilty  of 
certain  opinions,  which  were  defined  and  declared  to 
be  heretical,  "  should  suffer  the  pains  of  death,  as  in 
case  of  felony,  without  benefit  of  cknryy*  This  was 
walking  in  the  precise  steps  of  Calvin.  It  is  a  case 
of  importance,  because  it  discovers  the  feelings  of  the 
most  intelligent  and  Influential  men  among  the  Calvi- 
nlsts,  and  is  thus  an  accurate  index  to  the  impressions 
and  Inclinations  of  the  less  informed  multitude. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  call  your  mind  to  the  first 
settlers  of  New-England.  The  odious  effects  of 
their  intolerance  and  persecutions  are  not  to  be  for- 
gotten by  any  one,  who  has  looked  at  the  history  of 
those  times.  For  the  honour  of  religion,  and  even 
of  humanity,  we  should  be  willing  to  have  them  for- 
gotten. But  when  appealing  to  history  for  the  in- 
fluence of  certain  doctrines,  justice  and  truth  de- 
mand a  fair  report.  The  laws  made  against  the 
heresies  of  Quakers  by  the  early  colonists  were,  if 
possible,  more  inhuman  than  those  of  the  Presbyte- 
rian parliament.  They  were  rigorously  put  in  exe- 
cution, and   in  several   instances  the  punishment  of 


*  This  act  was  passed  May  2,  1648.  Neal  says,  "  This  was  one  of  the  most 
shocking  laws  I  have  met  with,  and  shows  that  the  governing  Presbyterians  ol 
these  times  would  have  made  a  terrible  use  of  their  power,  if  it  had  been  sup- 
ported by  the  sword  of  the  civil  magistrate.'"  JVcaTs  Hislori/,  vol.  iii.  p.  497. 
Among  the  horcsies  which  were  to  be  punished  with  death,  was  the  denying, 
"  That  Christ  is  not  God  equal  with  the  Father, — or  that  the  Godhead  and 
Manhood  are  distinct  natures."  Imprisonment  was  threatened  to  such  as 
maintained,  "  That  man  by  nature  hath  free  will  to  turn  to  God, — that  the 
soul  of  man  sleeps,  when  the  body  is  dead, — that  man  is  bound  to  believe  no 
more  than  by  liis  reason  he  can  comprehend."'     Ibid. 


LET.  IV.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  339 

death  was  actually  inflicted.*  The  first  Baptists, 
who  came  into  the  country,  were  also  treated  with 
great  severity,  and  punished  in  various  ways  for  their 
heresy.  Now  the  persons,  who  ran  into  these  ex- 
cesses, were  Calvinists  of  "  the  stricter  sort,"  who  em- 
braced the  dogmas  of  this  faith  in  their  fullest  ex- 
tent, and  even  while  committing  these  outrages 
against  the  laws  of  our  common  nature,  imagined 
themselves  acting  under  the  imperious  guidance  of 
their  religious  principles. 

Such  is  the  influence  of  Calvinism  as  testified 
by  history.  How  far  your  appeal  proves  favoura- 
ble to  your  position,  let  the  impartial  decide.  The 
particulars  here  selected  are  leading  features  in  the 
history  of  Calvinism ;  and  it  is  remarkable,  that 
where  the  principles  of  this  faith  have  been  most 
prevalent,  and  met  with  least  opposition,  their  evil 
effects  have  been  most  severely  felt.  In  Geneva, 
where   nearly  all  were   Calvinists,  Castalio,   Bolsec, 

*  "  The  Quakers,"  says  Belknap,  "  were  at  first  banished,  but  this  provino- 
insufficient,  a  succession  of  sanguinary  laws  was  enacted  against  them,  of 
which  imprisonment,  whipping,  cutting  off  the  ears,  boring  the  tongue  with  a 
hot  iron,  and  banishment  on  pain  of  death,  were  the  terrible  sanctions."  His- 
tory of  JVew  Hampshire,  vol.  i.  p.  90.  For  some  curious  remarks  on  this  sub- 
ject, and  a  further  confirmation  of  what  is  here  said,  See  Mather's  Magnalia 
Christi,  Book  vii.  c.  4. 

"  The  Presbyterians,"  says  Mr.  Gray,  "  called  toleration  a  hideous  monster, 
the  great  Diana  of  the  Independents."  Bamp.  Lee.  p.  284,  as  quoted  in 
Kda.rns  Religious  World  Displayed,  Vo\.  IH.p.tS.  We  know,  ^Iso,  that 
forty  years  ago  the  suspicions  of  the  public  were  so  strong  against  the  tolera- 
tion of  Presbyterians,  that  the  Synod  of  New  York  and  Philadelphia  thought 
it  necessary,  "  solemnly  and  publicly  to  declare,  that  they  ever  have,  and  still 
do,  renounce  and  abhor  the  principles  of  intolerance."  .Assembly'' s  Digest,  p. 
337. 


340  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

and  others  were  banished,  and  Servetus  was  murder- 
ed ;  in  Holland,  where  opjDosition  was  stronger,  and 
the  influence  of  milder  principles  had  some  weight, 
the  tide  of  persecution  ran  with  less  violence  ;  in  En- 
gland, for  similar  reasons,  its  violence  was  still  less,  not 
theoretically,  but  practically,  not  in  default  of  incli- 
nation, but  of  power,  and  of  public  countenance  ;  in 
New-England,  the  scenes  of  Geneva  were  again  acted 
over,  because  all  were  Calvinists,  and  the  natural  as- 
perity of  their  sentiments  was  not  softened  by  inter- 
course with  others,  whose  views  were  more  rational 
and  temperate. 

I  might  examine  your  appeal  to  history  in  another 
light,  and  make  some  inquiries  into  the  histoiical 
grounds  on  which  you  boast  of  the  epithets,  strict, 
austere,  and  puritanical,  as  applied  to  Calvinists. 
What  has  gained  them  the  honour  of  having  the  ex- 
clusive appropriation  of  these  epithets?  I  believe  no 
Calvinist  has  before  thought  of  claiming  them  as  to- 
kens of  the  religious  purity  of  his  sect.  Is  it  true, 
that  they  have  ever  been  employed  to  denote  the 
sincere  religion  of  the  heart  ?  To  call  a  man  austere 
and  puritanical,  is  at  once  to  insinuate,  that  you  have 
suspicions  of  his  honest  professions  and  latent  piety. 
If  I  am  not  greatly  mistaken,  this  is  the  universal 
sense  of  mankind  ;  and  if  the  inquiry  were  pursued,  I 
have  no  doubt  that  the  origin  of  these  epithets  would 
be  found  in  the  features  of  Calvinism  just  portrayed. 
I  would  only  infer,  that  the  use  of  these  words  adds 
no  strength,  but  rather  weakness,  to  your  argument 
for  the  moral  tendency  of  Calvinism. 


LET.  IV.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  341 

I  would  make  the  same  inference  on  another  con- 
sideration. There  has  been  no  sect,  probably,  wliom 
the  world  would  more  readily  agree  in  calling  austere, 
puritanical^  and  of  the  stricter  sort,  than  the  Phari- 
sees of  old,  and  yet  our  Saviour  gives  us  no  flattering 
picture  of  their  morals  or  piety.  Why  may  not  the 
words  have  the  same  meaning,  when  applied  to  a 
modern  sect,  whether  composed  of  Calvinists,  or  those 
of  any  other  faith?  Do  you  rej)ly,  that  the  Pharisees 
were  hypocrites  and  pretenders,  thinking  more  of 
outward  appearances,  than  of  inward  purity?  That 
is  true,  and  it  is  the  very  reason  why  we  call  them 
austere  and  puritanical.  No  one  would  apply  these 
epithets  to  the  Apostles.  But  why  not,  except  that 
their  sincerity  and  piety  were  never  doubted?  If  it 
had  always  been  thus  with  all  christians,  if  there  had 
never  been  any  one,  qui  aliud  est,  et  aliud  simulat,  the 
use  of  these  words,  which  you  think  an  indication  of 
the  superior  morals  of  Calvinists,  would  never  have 
been  known. 


342  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  i>. 

LETTER  V. 

Doctrines  of  Eternal  Punishment,  and  Annihilation. 


Before  I  enter  on  the  Immediate  subject  of  this 
letter,  allow  me  to  offer  a  few  remarks  on  one  or  two 
other  particulars,  embraced  in  your  charges  against 
the  morality  of  Unitarians. 

You  say,  they  teach  that  the  various  exercises  of 
mind,  supposed  by  some  to  be  essential  to  piety,  arc  mere 
dreams  of  enthusiasm.  This  is  so  vague  a  chai'ge,  that 
it  hardly  admits  of  a  formal  reply.  What  you  would 
have  your  readers  understand  by  "  the  various  exer- 
cises of  mind,"  which  you  mention,  they  are  left  to 
conjecture.  To  meet  such  a  statement,  it  were  irre- 
levant and  useless  to  produce  argument. 

Unitarians  believe  piety  to  be  a  rational  and  opera- 
tive principle,  founded  on  a  knowledge  of  God,  of 
his  will,  and  of  his  requirements.  The  piety,  which 
they  preach  and  strive  to  cultivate,  is  various  in  its 
character  and  objects.  It  is  a  devout  and  impressive 
sense  of  the  majesty,  goodness,  mercy,  and  holiness  of 
God.  It  fills  the  mind  with  serious  meditations  on 
the  divine  perfections,  and  the  divine  laws,  and  not 
only  rules  in  the  understanding,  but  penetrates  the 
heart  and  kindles  the  affections.  The  pious  mind 
will  feel  grateful  for  the  blessings  it  receives,  and  find 


LET,  v.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  343 

its  liveliest  joy  in  pouring  out  thanksgivings  and 
praises  to  the  author  of  all  good.  Especially  will  it 
glorify  his  name  for  the  way  of  salvation,  which  he 
has  granted  through  his  Son  Jesus  Christ.  It  will 
always  have  an  impressive  conviction  of  the  unceas- 
ing presence  of  God,  and  be  humbled  with  a  sense  of 
its  own  dependence  and  weakness.  Unitarians  think 
it  also  an  essential  part  of  piety,  that  they  should 
strive  to  imitate  the  example  of  the  Saviour  in  all 
things.  While  they  love  God,  they  desire  to  love  his 
rational  creatures,  to  treat  them  as  brethren,  respect 
their  sincere  professions,  refrain  from  judging  them 
harshly,  or  denying  them  the  rights  and  hopes  of 
christians. 

They  believe  charity  a  very  important  branch  of 
piety. 

The  man,  who  is  ready  to  listen  to  the  whispers 
of  malevolence,  raise  the  voice  of  detraction,  or  hurl 
the  weapons  of  denunciation,  gives  no  convincing  tes- 
timony in  their  view,  that  the  pride  of  his  own  heart 
is  subdued,  or  that  he  has  the  temper  of  the  Gospel. 
In  few  words.  Unitarians  preach  a  piety,  which  is  in- 
tended to  engage  the  heart,  soul  and  strength  in  a 
sincere  love  and  service  of  God,  which  shall  restrain 
all  the  unhallowed  desires  and  wayward  inclinations, 
which  shall  make  men  acquainted  with  the  deceit- 
fulness  and  vanity  of  their  own  hearts,  and  clothe 
them  with  a  deep  humility,  sorrow  for  their  sins,  and 
unfeigned  repentance — which  shall  open  the  channels 
of  benevolence  and  kind  feelings  towards  their  fellow 
men,  direct   their  steps  in  the  ways  of  Christ,  raise 


344  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

their  minds  and  conversation  to  heaven,  and  prepare 
them  for  the  future  good  pleasure  and  holy  service 
of  God. 

It  is  an  evil  report  to  say,  that  Unitarians  are 
averse  to  any  "  exercises  of  the  mind,"  which  em- 
brace these  objects.  Whatever  ministers  to  true  holi- 
ness in  others,  they  joyfully  commend,  and  would  de- 
sire to  imitate  ;  and  I  deny  that  they  are  ever  ac- 
customed to  attribute  any  thing  to  enthusiasm,  which 
is  obviously  connected  with  a  pure  intention  and  a 
holy  life.  When  we  see  persons  fond  of  trumpeting 
to  the  world  the  extraordinary  merits  of  their  own 
piety,  eager  to  scatter  in  the  ears  of  the  multitude 
the  raptures  of  their  indescribable  exercises,  loud  in 
proclaiming  themselves  the  peculiar  favourites  of 
heav(  n.  clamorous  in  revealing  the  ecstacies  with 
which  their  hearts  are  daily  and  hourly  visited,  and 
busy  in  drawing  lines  of  distinction  between  them- 
selves and  others,  whom,  in  the  excess  of  their  chris- 
tian charity,  they  assign  to  lower  ranks  in  religious 
faith,  attainments,  and  purity,  however  sincere  and 
ardent  they  may  be  in  their  endeavours, — whenever 
we  see  such  persons,  experience  has  taught  us,  that 
Ave  ought  to  be  prepared  for  more  of  spiritual  pride 
and  self  complacency,  than  of  unfeigned  piety,  true 
holiness,  or  the  heavenly  spirit  of  the  meek  and  low- 
ly Jesus.  We  are  unwilling  to  allow,  that  we  have 
been  heedless  observers,  and  we  frankly  confess,  that 
we  have  seen  no  persons  more  barren  in  the  genuine 
fruits  of  religion,  than  those  who  make  the  loudest 
professions,  talk  the  most  of  secret  and  invisible  com- 


tET.  v.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  345 

munications,  and  weary  the  world  with  endless  details 
and  incidents  with  which  no  one  has  any  concern  but 
their  own  souls  and  their  God. 

We  have  never  discovered,  that  the  dispositions 
of  such  persons  have  borne  any  uncommon  marks  of 
conformity  to  the  will  of  God,  that  they  were  ready 
to  make  any  extraordinary  sacrifices  in  the  divine 
service,  or  were  more  abstracted  than  others  of 
humbler  pretensions  from  the  absorbing  interests  of 
the  world.  Show  us  the  holy  man  of  God,  whose 
life  is  the  transcript  of  his  mind,  and  you  will  point 
to. one,  who  communes  with  himself,  who  is  an  hum- 
ble, silent  worshipper,  content  to  let  the  warmth  of 
his  zeal  be  felt  through  the  medium  of  his  good  af- 
fections, and  his  religious  impressions  be  seen  in  the 
tenour  and  unvarying  rectitude  of  his  life. 

You  next  charge  Unitarians  with  preaching,  that 
the  strictness  and  seclusion  from  fashionable  amuse- 
ments,  such  as  the  theatre,  the  ballroom,  and  the  card- 
table,  which  some  inculcate,  are  uncommanded  austeri- 
ties, and  being  "  righteous  overmuch^  This  charge, 
though  more  definite,  is  as  groundless  as  the  one  just 
considered.  I  acknowledge  that  our  preachers  do 
not  often  so  far  forget  themselves,  or  the  sacred 
places  in  which  they  stand,  as  to  preach  about  thea- 
tres, cardtables,  and  ballrooms.  It  is  hoped  and  pre- 
sumed, that  few  of  them  are  so  insensible  of  the  so- 
lemnity of  the  occasion,  and  of  the  nature  of  their 
religion,  as  to  profane  the  holy  sabbath  of  God  in 
his  sanctuary  by  going  into  the  haunts  of  dissipation, 
idleness,  and  vice,  to  find  topics,  and  select  images,  for 
44 


,)4G  MORAL  TEiXDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  tv, 

the  religious  instruction  and  edification  of  a  christian 
audience.  These  are  not  the  things  with  which 
they  wish  to  make  their  hearers  famihar.  No. 
They  think  it  important  to  impress  the  words  of 
Christ  and  his  Apostles,  the  doctrines  and  rules  of 
the  Gospel,  the  duties  and  expectations  of  christians. 
They  preach  against  vice,  and  the  dominion  of  sin, 
and  not  against  theatres,  ballrooms,  or  cardtables. 
They  proclaim  the  laws  of  God  as  they  are  reveal- 
ed in  his  word,  the  necessity  of  obedience  to  these 
laws,  and  the  judgments  that  await  the   impenitent. 

Vice  is  a  taint  of  the  mind,  from  which  it  is  not  to 
be  freed  by  referring  to  particular  acts.  Enlighten 
the  conscience,  make  plain  the  duties  and  impress 
the  obligations  of  religion,  and  you  will  gain  a  hold  on 
the  mind,  which  will  serve  as  an  anchor  of  safety  in 
all  times  of  doubt  and  peril.  By  this  process  you 
will  make  men  see  and  confess  their  sins,  and  hasten 
to  escape  from  their  debasing  thraldom.  They  will 
avoid  wickedness,  because  they  perceive  its  evil  na- 
ture and  tendency.  There  is  no  reason  why  we 
bhould  attempt  to  particularize  at  the  })resent  day, 
more  than  our  Saviour  and  his  Apostles  of  old.  I 
know  not  that  our  preachers  can  follow  abetter  mo- 
del ;  and  the  specimens,  which  you  have  selected 
and  charged  them  with  overlooking,  are  the  last  from 
which  it  could  be  hoped  any  aids  would  be  gained  to 
devotion,  seriousness,  or  virtue. 

Your  charge  goes  farther,  and  accuses  Unitarians 
ifot  merely  of  neglecting  to  preach  on  these  things, 
but  of  holding  them  up  as  "  uncommanded  austeri- 


LET.  V,]      MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.        347 

ties,  and  being  righteous  overmuch."  Nothing  can 
be  more  unfair,  I  will  say,  indeed,  unfounded,  than 
this  insinuation.  If  it  were  an  innocent  mistake,  it 
might  be  passed  over,  hke  many  others,  which  I  have 
not  had  time  to  notice.  But  it  is  hardly  of  this  cha- 
racter, for  it  gives  the  impression,  that  Unitarians 
preach  immorahty  ;  that  they  not  only  avoid  what  is 
good,  but  inculcate  what  is  bad.  The  wicked  practi- 
ces, from  which  other  christians  are  warned  by  their 
leaders  to  abstain,  are  said  to  be  represented  by  uni- 
tarian preachers  as  austerities  to  which  their  hear- 
ers need  not  submit,  and  as  requiring  an  unnecessary 
degree  of  righteousness.  Of  this  statement  I  can 
only  say,  it  is  one  for  which  you  cannot  bring  a  sha- 
dow of  proof,  and  is  as  opposite  to  the  reality,  as 
darkness  to  light.  Unitarian  preaching  is  distinguish- 
ed for  nothing  more,  than  its  rigid  practical  tenden- 
cy. It  requires  men  to  be  christians  in  the  entire 
spirit  of  the  Gospel,  and  to  seek  the  favour  of  God 
by  an  unremitted  obedience  to  his  laws. 

Your  next  charge  is,  that,  according  to  this  preach- 
ing, all  men,  whatever  may  be  their  character,  will 
finally  be  saved,  or  annihilated.  This  is  a  subject  of 
importance,  and  claims  to  be  examined  with  attention. 
We  have  first  to  ascertain  whether  your  position  be 
correct  in  point  of  fact.  It  must  be  kept  in  mind, 
that  you  are  professedly  talking  of  doctrines  "incul- 
cated by  unitarian  preachers  all  over  the  world.''''  This 
you  have  repeated,  seemingly  to  prevent  any  mistake 
in  regard  to  the  limits  to  which  you  Avould  have  you?= 
remarks  applied. 


348  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv, 

It  would  be  a  laborious,  and  perhaps  a  fruitless  task, 
to  carry  back  our  inquiries  to  the  primitive  Unitarians. 
We  must  be  contented  to  commence  with  the  churches 
in  Transylvania  and  Poland,  where  Unitarianism  was 
revived  in  modern  times,  and  flourished  under  various 
fortunes  for  many  years.     The  Racovian  Catechism, 
although  it  was  never  adopted  as  a  system  of  faith, 
is  well  known  to  express  in  very  full  terms  the  doc- 
trines of  those  churches,  and  was  drawn  up  by  Soci- 
nus,  aided  by  others  among  the  most  learned  theolo- 
gians of  the  fraternity.     This  Catechism  teaches,  by 
implication   at   least,  the  eternity  of  future    punish- 
ment ;  and  B.  Wissowatius,  in  a  note  on  the  passage 
in  which   the  sentiment   is  conveyed,  asserts  it  "  al- 
ways to  have  been  the  opinion  of  the  church,  that 
the  wicked  will  be  doomed  to  punishment,  and  cast 
into  the  fire  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels." 
And  again,  after  referring  to  the   principal  authors 
among  the  Fratres  Poloni,  and  other  emment  writers 
of  the  unitarian  faith,  he  says,  it  is  evident  they  "  con- 
stantly maintained,  that  there  will  be  a  resurrection 
both  of  the  just,  and  of  the  unjust,  and  that  the  lat- 
ter shall  be  consigned  to  everlasting  punishment,  but 
the  former  admitted  to  everlasting  life."     Such   was 
the  opinion  of  the  numerous  Unitarians,  who  spread 
over  Europe  in  the  sixteenth  century.* 

*  Wissowatius  refers  to  Siinpliciiis  and  Volkelius — to  Crellius's  Commenta- 
ry on  Mattii.  iii.  10;  2Thess.  i.  8,  9  ;  Heb.  x.  27— to  Slichtingius  on  John  v. 
29— to  Wolzogenius  on  Matth.  iii.  12 ;  x.  28  ;  xxv.  41,  46  ;  John  v.  29— and 
to  A.  Wissowatius  on  Acts  xxiv.  15.  See  Racovian  Catechisin,  translated  ]}y 
pr.  T.  Rees,  p.  367.    Note. 


iET,  v.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM,  349 

You  will  meet  with  the  same  sentiment  in  the 
Swiss  and  French  churches,  which  have  more  re- 
cently come  over  to  this  faith.  In  the  Catechism  of 
these  churches,  which  is  called  the  Geneva  Cate- 
chism, it  is  said  of  the  wicked,  that  "  they  will  be 
tormented  with  remorse  and  abandoned  to  despair, 
because  they  have  lost  eternal  happiness  by  their  own 
misconduct."*  The  belief  of  the  unitarian  churches 
in  Holland  on  this  subject,  I  have  no  means  of  ascer- 
taining, but  there  is  reason  to  suppose  it  is  similar  to 
that  of  the  churches  last  mentioned. 

In  England  opinions  respecting  this  point  are  va- 
rious among  Unitarians,  as  they  are  with  most  other 
denominations.  It  is  certain,  however,  that  they 
universally  believe  in  the  future  punishment  of  the 
wicked  ;  but  not  many,  probably,  believe  in  the  eter- 
nity of  this  punishment,  at  least  in  the  sense  of  Cal- 
vinists.  They  do  not  pretend  to  define  its  precise 
duration,  but  hold  that  it  will  be  in  such  degree 
and  extent,  as  God  in  his  justice  and  mercy  shall  see 
fit  to  inflict  on  the  wicked. 

The  following  extract  is  from  the  Christian  Disciple, 
a  work  conducted  by  a  number  of  clergymen  in  Boston 
and  its  vicinity,  and  may  be  supposed  to  convey  the 
prevailing  sentiment  of  the  Unitarians  in  this  country. 
"  We  cannot  but  wonder  and  lament,  that  any  should  so 
far  pervert  the  oracles  of  God,  as  to  persuade  men 
to  believe,  that  there  is  no  punishment  hereafter,  an 


*  Geneva  Catechism,  p.  105.     The  texts  quoted  are  Mark  ix.  43  ;  Matth; 
xxiii.  13 


350  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  i», 

error,  we  repeat,  most  dangerous  to  the  interests 
of  society  ;  it  breaks  down  the  barriers  of  conscience, 
and  removes  those  salutary  restraints,  without  which 
neither  virtue,  nor  reputation,  nor  property,  are  se- 
cure."* 

The  true  state  of  the  case  is,  then,  that  Unitarians 
as  a  body  universally  beheve  in  the  future  punish- 
ment of  the  wicked.  By  a  very  large  number  this 
punishment  has  been  considered  eternal.  By  others 
it  is  supposed  to  be  limited  in  duration,  but  to  be  se- 
vere and  dreadful,  according  to  the  representations 
of  the  scriptures,  and  in  proportion  to  the  sins  of 
each  individual. 

But  even  admitting  it  to  be  the  faith  of  any  num- 
ber, or  a  majority,  or  the  whole  denomination  of 
Unitarians,  that  all  men  will  finally  be  restored  to 
the  favour  of  God,  and  saved,  why  should  they  be 
selected  as  singular  in  this  belief,  and  exposed  to 
censure,  as  if  they  maintained  a  novel  doctrine,  and 
one  which  has  not  been  supported  by  many  pious 
christians  in  all  ages  of  the  church  ?  It  is  no 
more  essential  to  Unitarianism,  than  to  Trinitarian- 
ism,  and  it  is  a  fact  which  will  not  be  contested,  that 
by  far  the  greater  portion  of  those,  who  have  em- 
braced it,  were  Trinitarians.  In  its  essential  cha- 
racter it  is  just  as  closely  allied  to  one  of  these 
general  modes  of  faith  as  to  the  other. 

Church  history  represents  the  doctrine  of  restora- 

*  Christian  Disciple,  No.  70,  for  March  and  April,  1819.  See  also  Dr. 
Ware's  Letters,  p.  130. 


fcET.  v.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  351 

tion,  or  of  the  final  salvation  of  all  men,  as  prevail- 
ing from  the  first  age  of  Christianity.  It  was  a  fa- 
vourite tenet  with  the  great  and  learned  Origen ; 
and  it  is  frequently  mentioned  in  the  writings  both  of 
the  earlier  and  later  Fathers.  Some  avow  it  to  be 
their  faith,  and  others  introduce  such  allusions,  as  to 
show,  that  it  was  a  tenet  common  to  many  christians 
at  the  time  they  wrote.  Clemens  Alexandrinus,  who 
flourished  in  the  latter  part  of  the  second  century, 
and  who  was  the  preceptor  of  Origen,  says,  "  The 
Lord  is  not  a  propitiation  for  our  sins  only,  that  is, 
of  the  faithful,  but  also  for  the  whole  world.  There- 
fore he  indeed  saves  all  universally,  some  being  con- 
verted by  punishments,  and  others  by  their  sponta- 
neous inclination."*  Gregory  Nazianzen  expresses 
his  doubts  of  endless  punishment,  and  intimates^ 
while  speaking  of  the  supposed  scripture  sense  of 
the  doctrine,  that  we  are  to  understand  it  in  a  milder 
form,  and  one  more  worthy  of  the  Being  that  pu- 
nishes.f  Gregory  Nyssen  holds,  "  that  it  is  abso- 
lutely necessary  that  evil  should  be  removed  out  of 
the  circle  of  being,  and  so  entirely  abolished,  that 
nothing  shall  remain,  which  can  be  a  receptacle  of 
it."J  Sulpitius  Severus  exhorts  the  Devil  to  cease 
from  tempting  and  persecuting  man,  and  tells  him, 
that  he   could  w^lth   perfect   confidence  in  God  pro- 

*Non  solum  autem  pro  nostris  peccatis  Dominus  propitiator  est,  hoc  est 
firtelium,  seel  etiam  pro  toto  mundo.  Proiiule  universos  quidem  salrat ;  sed 
alios  per  supplicia  convertens,  alios  autem  spontanea  assequeiites  voliintate. 
Adumhrat,  in  Ej>.  1  Johan.  ver.  2. 

t  See  preface  to  White's  Restoration  of  All  Things,  p,  ix. 

tibid.  p.x. 


352  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.         [part  iv. 

mise  even  him  the  mercy  of  Christ  if  he  would  re- 
pent.* 

Augustin  speaks  of  persons  engaged  with  him  in 
controversy,  who  were  patrons  of  this  opinion,  and 
who  from  him  have  been  called  merciful  doctors- 
They  did  not  believe  in  the  eternity  of  punishment, 
but  held,  that  "  after  certain  periods  of  time,  longer 
or  shorter  according  to  the  sins  of  men,  they  would 
be  liberated."t  Jerom  was  of  opinion,  that  future 
punishments  ought  not  to  be  measured  by  human 
wisdom,  but  left  to  God  alone,  "  who  knows  whom, 
how  much,  and  hoiv  long,  he  ought  to  judge."J  Fa- 
cundus  professes  himself  a  disciple  of  Origen. 

Such  were  the  opinions  of  some  of  the  Fathers. 
In  Germany  this  doctrine  existed  before  the  Refor- 
mation ;  and  since  that  period  it  has  been  received 
by  numerous  persons  in  every  sect  of  Christians. 
Many  divines,  and  theological  writers  of  note  have 
been  its  defenders.  It  was  countenanced  by  Tillot- 
son,  of  whom  Whiston  remarks,  that  "  he  chose  rather 
to   give   up  the  divine   veracity  of  God  in  these  his 

*  Si  tu  ipse,  O  Miseiabilis,  ab  hominum  insectatione  desisteres,  et  te  facto- 
tum tuorum  vel  hoc  tempore  cum  dies  judicii  in  proximo  est,  poeniteret,  ego 
tibi  vereconfisus  in  Domino  Christi  misericordiam  pollicerer.  De  Vita  Mart, 
p.  488.  Ed.  Lug.  Eat.  1647. 

tNolunt  credere  poenam  sempiternam  futuram,  sed  flost  certi  temporis  me- 
tam  pro  ciijusque  peccati  quantitate  longioris  sive  brevioris  eos  inde  exisli- 
mant  liberandos.     De  Civ.  Dei.  lib.  XXI.  cap.  17. 

Ij.  Quod  nos  Dei  solius  debemus  scientiae  derelinquere  cujus  non  solum  mi- 
secicordiae,  sed  et  tormenta  in  pondere  sunt;  et  novit  quem,  quomodo,  et 
quamdiu,  debet  judicare.     Comment,  in  Esai.  ad  Jinem. 

See  further  quotations  from  the  Fathers  to  tlie  same  purpose  in  the  Preface 
to  lVhite''s  Restoration,  and  also  in  Burnet's  Traclatut  De  Statu  Mortuorum 
et  Resiirgentinm.  cap.  X. 


r.KT.  v.]  MORAL  TENDErsCY  OF  CALVINISM.  353 

fhreateniiigs,  than  to  defend  the  eternity  of  punish- 
ment." Tillotson  beheved  eternal  punishment  to 
be  threatened  in  the  Scriptures,  but  held,  that  it 
might  be  only  a  threat,  designed  to  keep  men  from 
sinning,  but  which  God  is  by  no  means  obliged  to  pui 
in  execution.  Strange,  and  absurd,  and  derogatory 
as  this  notion  may  appear,  it  was  seriously  advanced 
by  Tillotson.  He  insisted,  however,  that  men  ought 
to  act  on  the  supposition,  that  God  is  sincere,  for  al- 
though it  is  not  necessary,  that  he  should  execute 
his  thrcatenings,  yet  it  is  possible,  an^l  perhaps  pro- 
bable, and  we  ought  to  be  prepared  for  the  worst.* 
Henry  More  is  said  to  favour  this  doctrine  in  his 
Divine  Dialogues.  Dr.  Bennett  and  Bishop  Burnet 
jn  their  respective  treatises  on  the  Articles  of  the 
Church  of  England,  express  a  belief,  that  eternal 
death  made  no  part  of  the  sentence  against  Adam. 
Bishop  Newton,  Dr.  Rust  Bishop  of  Dromore,  Dr. 
Thomas  Burnet,  Dr.  Cheyne,t  Jeremiah  White, 
William  Law,  author  of  the  Serious  Call^X  the  pious 


*  Tillotson  sa}'?,  "  He  that  threatens,  keeps  the  right  of  punishing  in  his  own 
hand,  and  is  not  obliged  to  execute  what  he  hath  threatened  any  farther  than 
the  reasons  and  ends  of  government  do  require  ;  and  he  may,  without  injury 
to  the  party  threatened,  remit  and  abate  as  much  as  he  pleaseth  of  the  pi> 
nishment  tliat  he  hath  threatened  ;  and  because  in  so  doin^  he  is  not  worse, 
but  better  than  his  word,  nobody  can  find  fault,  or  complain  of  any  wrong  or 
injustice  thereby  done  to  him."     Sermons  Vol.  III.  p.  13. 

Again,  "  The  liigher  the  threatening  runs,  so  mucli  the  more  mercy  and  good- 
ness there  is  in  it ;  because  it  is  so  much  the  more  likely  to  hinder  men  from 
incurring  the  penalty  that  is  threatened."    Ibid.  p.  17. 

t  Cheyne  held,  that  "some  individuals  may  be  delivered  sooner,  and  some 
later,  according  as  their  expiation  and  purification  is  perfected."  L'hei/nr''s 
Discourses,  p.  25. 

X  "  As  for  the  purification  of  all  human  nature,"  says  Law,  "  either  in  tliis 
-'orld,  or  some  after  ages,  I  fully  believe  it."     Letters,  n,  175. 

45 


354  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv, 

and  intellectual  Hartley,*  the  equally  pious  Lavater, 
Chevalier  Ramsaj,  Winchester,  Coppin,  Worthing- 
tbn,  Stonehouse,  and  many  others,  believed  in  the 
restoration  and  final  happiness  of  all  men,  and  wrote 
with  much  learning  and  talent  in  explanation  of  their 
views. 

All  the  persons  mentioned  above,  it  is  believed^ 
Avere  Trinitarians,  and  accounted  orthodox.  And  if 
you  will  examine  the  subject,  you  will  unquestionably 
find  the  number  of  treatises  written  by  Trinitarians 
in  support  of  this  doctrine,  to  be  to  those  written  by 
Unitarians,  in  a  ratio  of  at  least  ten  to  one.  Many 
Unitarians  have  touched  the  subject  in  connexion 
with  other  topics,  but  if  wc  except  Dr.  Chauncy, 
hardly  another  will  remain,  who  has  writlen  a  for- 
mal work  in  defence  of  universal  salvation.  And 
what  is  still  more  remarkable,  the  sect  itself,  which 
has  taken  its  distinctive  name  from  this  tenet  of  its 
faith,  has,  till  very  lately,  been  composed  entirely  of 
Trinitarians.  Even  now,  the  number  of  those  of 
this  sect,  who  have  become  Unitarians,  is  undoubted- 
ly small. 

Considering  these  things,  it  will  not  readily  be 
seen  on  what  principles  of  justice  this  doctrine  is 
laid  on  the  shoulders  of  Unitarians,  and  adduced  as 
an  evidence  of  the  immoral  tendency  of  their  preach- 
ing. Let  it  be  understood,  that  they  believe,  as  the 
greater  portion  of  them  probably  do,  that  God  will 
restore  his  olTending  creatures  to  happiness,  when  he 

*  Observations  on  Man.  Vol.  II.  p.  419—437. 


LET.  v.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  355 

has  punished  them  according  to  the  full  measure  of 
their  sins;  why  should  this  faith  be  brought  down  up- 
on them  as  a  charge  against  their  morality  ?  The  ex- 
cellent men  whose  names  have  just  been  mentioned, 
were  eminent  examples  of  christian  piety  and  cha- 
racter, as  far  as  we  know;  nor  have  we  ever  heard 
that  others  among  Trinitarians,  holding  the  same 
faith,  have  on  this  account,  been  noted  for  defects  of 
morals.  Why  then  drag  Unitarians  forward,  and  ex- 
hibit them  as  worthy  of  reprobation  for  entertaining 
a  sentiment  in  common  with  many  other  christians  of 
various  denominations,  whose  reputation  for  morals 
and  piety  has  never  been  impeached  on  account  of 
this  tenet? 

The  doctrine  of  universal  salvation  is  in  very  close 
accordance  with  high  calvinistic  principles.  If  you 
take  away  the  notion  of  election  and  reprabation,  it 
becomes  a  necessary  part  of  the  system  which  re- 
mains. If  Christ  has  made  an  atonement  for  the 
sins  of  the  whole  w^orld,  or  in  other  words,  if  his  suf- 
ferings were  taken  as  a  substitute  for  the  sins  of  men, 
his  righteousness  being  imputed  to  them  and  their 
sins  to  him,  it  follows,  that  all  men  will  attain  salva- 
tion through  him.  The  benefits  of  his  substitution  can- 
not be  restricted,  because,  according  to  the  calvinis- 
tic plan,  he  was  an  Almighty  Surety.  Calvinism,  in 
the  first  place,  makes  all  men  so  deplorably  wicked, 
from  the  very  constitution  of  their  nature,  as  justly 
to  consign  them  in  a  mass  to  everlasting  perdition  ; 
and  then,  to  rescue  them  from  this  state,  it  resorts 
to  the  sufferings  and  death  of  an  Almighty  Being,  a^ 


356  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  ir. 

the  only  means  of  removing  so  great  an  evil.  So 
far  it  is  consistent  enough  ;  and  one  would  suppose 
a  balance  is  fairly  made.  However  deep  and  radi- 
cal the  depravity,  no  particle  of  it  could  remain  un- 
touched by  the  efficacy  of  an  Almiglily  Surety.  But 
now  comes  the  strange  inconsistency  of  the  scheme. 
Its  framers  Avere  not  prepared  to  think  so  favoura- 
bly of  the  goodness  and  pardoning  mercy  of  God,  as 
the  last  part  of  the  above  plan  would  indicate. 
Hence  they  contrived,  with  perfect  inconsistency ,  to 
incorporate  the  notion  of  election  and  reprobation. 
Had  the  surety  been  less  than  Almighty,  this  notion 
Avould  not  have  involved  so  complete  a  contradiction. 
But  to  allovv'  this  would  be  todestroy  the  equality  of 
the  three  persons  in  the  trinity,  as  well  as  to  provide 
an  inefficient  remedy  for  an  infmite  depravity. 
Amidst  so  many  contending  difficulties,  it  was  per- 
haps Avisely  decided  to  choose  the  least. 

Many  Calvinists,  seeing  this  absurdity,  have  em- 
ployed themselves  in  improving  their  system  by  di- 
vesting it  of  this  incoherent  part,  and  have  conse- 
quently discovered,  that  they  were  no  longer  Cal- 
vinists, but  Universalists.  This  was  the  case  with 
Relly,  the  friend  and  companion  of  Whitefield;  and 
also  with  Dr.  Huntingdon,  who  even  gave  the  title  of 
Calvinism  Improved  to  his  work,  setting  forth  the 
doctrine  of  universal  salvation.  And  if  the  growing 
propensity,  which  now  shows  itself  among  Calvinists, 
cither  to  say  as  little  as  possible  of  their  once  favou- 
rite doctrine  of  election,  or  to  deny  it  altogether, 
should  continue,  and,  at  the  same  time  the  other  ri- 


LET.  v.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  357 

gid  tenets  of  Calvinism  should  be  retained,  we  may 
expect  at  no  distant  period  to  see  the  ranks  of  Uni- 
versalism  greatly  strengthened  from  this  quarter. 

Mr.  White,  it  is  true,  fancied  himself  a  most  zea- 
lous Calvinist,  at  the  time  he  was  writing  a  very  in- 
genious argument  against  eternal  punishment.  He 
was  so  partial  to  election,  the  ruling  dogma  of  his 
faith,  that  he  could  not  give  it  up,  but  undertook  the 
labour  of  reconciling  it  with  the  doctrine  of  universal 
restoration.  He  affirmed  the  election  to  be  "not  of 
qualities  and  principles,  but  of  persons,  not  condition- 
al but  absolute,"  and  after  laying  down  this  postula- 
tum,  he  proceeds  to  show  from  the  Scriptures  how 
all  men  will  be  saved.  It  turns  out  in  the  end,  of 
course,  that  his  election  falls  to  the  ground,  and  he 
builds  his  theory  on  another  foundation.  This  whim 
of  clinging  to  the  name  of  election  was  an  embar- 
rassment to  his  argument,  but  it  is  ingenious  and 
strong  even  with  this  incumbrance.*  Mr.  Worth- 
ington  argues  for  the  restoration  of  all  things,  in  con- 
sequence of  the  infinite  efficacy  of  the  atonement  of 
Christ,  and  its  power  to  remove  every  species  of 
evil.t 

So  much  for  facts.  It  will  be  in  unison  with  the 
general  object  of  my  remarks,  to  say  a  few  words 
on  the  comparative  moral  tendency  of  tha  two  doc- 
trines just  noticed.     For  argument's  sake  let  it   be 

*  Restoration  of  All  things  ;  or  a  Vindication  of  the  Goodness  and  Grace 
of  God  to  be  manifested  at  last  in  the  recovery  of  the  whole  Creation  out 
of  their  Fall,  3d  Ed.  p.  87—109. 

t  Essay  on  Man's  Redemption,  p.  234—^30 


358  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVmiSM.  [part  it. 

admitted,  that  they  are  both  true.  Although  tliis 
would  be  an  impossibility,  yet  the  influence  of  a  doc- 
trine when  thoroughly  believed  does  not  depend  on 
its  truth  or  falsehood  ;  and  we  may  reason  on  this 
influence  without  reference  to  either.  I  will  confine 
my  remarks  to  two  particulars,  as  embracing  most,  if 
not  all  others,  namely,  the  love  of  God,  and  the  sanc- 
tion of  the  divine  laws* 

What   is    the  foundation  of    that    love    of  God. 


*  With  the  truth  or  falsehood  of  either  of  the  doctrines  I  have  at  present  no 
concern.  The  controversy  on  this  subject  is  well  known  to  rest  on  the  mean- 
ing of  a  single  Greek  word,  Aietv,  and  its  derivative  a.iavio;.  The  advocates  for 
one  doctrine  affirm,  that  the  word  signifies  an  eternal  duration  when  applied 
to  the  punishment  of  the  wicked  ;  while  those  on  the  other  side  maintain,  that  it 
should  always  be  taken  in  a  limited  sense  when  thus  applied.  Hence  the  whole 
controversy  becomes  a  matter  of  verbal  criticism,  and  it  is  one'  presumption 
against  the  doctrine  of  eternal  misery — a  doctrine  of  so  much  moment  if 
true — that  it  should  be  left  to  so  slender  a  defence  ;  and  more  especially,  as 
the  word  is  used  in  only^re  places  in  the  New  Testament  in  connexion  with 
the  punishment  of  sin,  where  it  is  supposed  to  mean  eternal  duration. 

Innumerable  examples  might  be  cited,  in  which  the  word  is  used  to  denote 
a  limited  duration  ;  and  particularly,  in  the  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Old 
Testament,  other  words  are  joined  with  it,  which  effectually  restrict  its  mean- 
ing. Thus  Exod.  XV.  13.  The  Lord  shall  reign,  rov  ttiutva.,  km  itt'  euceva.,  xai  iri, 
for  ever  and  ever,  and  farther.  Dan.  xii.  3.  They  shall  shine  as  the  stars, 
«?  rov  mm*,  x.aj  tri,  forever,  and  further.  Mic.  iv.  5.  He  will  walk  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  our  God,  tis  tov  euetvat.,  luti  tmnuvu.,  for  ever  and  beyond  it. 
See  Chauncy's  Salvation  of  all  men,  p.  263.  These  examples  are  enough  to 
prove,  that  the  word  may  be  used  in  a  limited  sense.  The  only  question  to 
be  settled  is,  whether  it  is  thus  used  in  reference  to  the  punishment  of  the 
wicked.  This,  Dr.  Chauncy  and  others  have  attempted  to  prove.  It  is  argued 
on  the  contrary,  that  the  same  reasons  why  it  should  thus  be  limited  when  ap- 
plied to  the  sufferings  of  the  wicked,  will  give  it  a  limited  sense  when  it  de- 
notes the  happiness  of  the  righteous. 

On  this  point  Burnet  says,  "  Nor  is  it  of  any  weight,  that  the  same  word  is 
applied  to  rewards  and  punishments;  for  the  eternal  hajjpiness  of  ti)e  taints 
contradicts  no  attributes  of  God,  and  there  we  have  no  reason  to  recede  from 
the  literal  sense  ;  and  words  must  yield  to  sense,  otherwise,  This  is  my  body, 
is  as  explicit  as  to  say,  Go  into  elcrnaljire."'    State  of  Jlic  Dead,  chap.  X. 


LET.  v.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  359 

Avhich  is  the  first  and  greatest  duty  of  Christians? 
Does  it  not  exist  in  those  excellencies  of  his  charac- 
ter, which  shine  forth  in  his  benevolence,  his  mercy, 
his  paternal  kindness,  and  unbounded  love  for  us? 
But  how  can  you  reconcile  these  attributes  with  the 
idea  of  his  having  doomed  a  certain  number  of  his 
creatures  to  an  endless  misery,  a  state  and  degree  of 
suifering,  which  bear  no  proportion  to  any  amount  of 
crimes,  that  a  ftnite  and  frail  being  is  capable  of  com- 
mitting ?  Does  not  this  doctrine,  viewed  thus  ab- 
stractedly, take  from  the  Deity  every  thing  that  is 
amiable,  and  lovely,  and  affectionate  ?  Can  you  look 
up  to  such  a  being  with  that  filial  reverence,  and  holy 
gratitude,  with  that  perfect  trust,  and  hope,  and  con- 
fidence, which  the  Scriptures  demand  towards  God, 
as  the  kind  Father,  protector,  and  righteous  judge 
of  men  ? 

Admitting  the  doctrine  to  be  true,  which  teaches, 
that  all  the  wicked  will  be  punished  hereafter  by  an 
awful  and  indescribable  visitation  of  God's  displea- 
sure, but  at  the  same  time  in  proportion  to  the  deserts 
of  every  individual,  till  at  length  they  shall  all  be 
purified  and  fitted  for  the  employments  and  happi- 
ness of  heaven,  and  be  made  to  act  an  important 
part  through  all  future  ages  in  celebrating  the  prai- 
ses and  advancing  the  glory  of  God, — I  say,  admit- 
ting this  doctrine  to  be  true,  does  it  not  exhibit  the 
Deity  in  a  more  exalted  and  engaging  light,  than  the 
other  doctrine,  and  under  such  a  character,  that  the 
soul  can  with  more  freedom  and  fervour  express  to- 
wards him   its   emotions   of  piety  and  love,  and  as 


360  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  it; 

will  enable  all  men  to  discharge  with  greater  since* 
rity  and  confidence  the  duties  springing  out  of  the 
relation  in  which  tlicj  stand  to  their  Maker  ?  This 
Avill  hardly  be  denied ;  and  if  not,  it  follows  most 
clearly,  that  the  moral  injluence  of  this  doctrine  is 
more  efficacious,  than  that  of  the  other,  in  drawing 
Us  to  a  proper  love  and  devout  service  of  the  Su- 
preme Being. 

In  regard  to  a  sanction  of  the  divine  laws  secur- 
ing a  virtuous  course,  it  must  first  be  asked  in  what 
way  the  circumstance  of  future  punishment  has  any 
influence  on  the  mind?  Evidently  by  its  being 
believed  nnd  Jidly  realized.  Whether  punishment 
be  infinite  or  limited,  will  be  of  no  consequence 
as  a  motive  to  action,  any  farther  than  it  can  be 
grasped  and  felt  by  the  mind.  When  it  is  understood^ 
that  future  suffering  will  be  in  exact  proportion  to 
the  wicked  deeds  and  intentions  of  this  life,  the  idea 
is  natural,  easy,  and  rational.  It  accords  with  the 
inherent  principles  of  justice.  There  are  persons^ 
whom  no  moral  considerations  will  actuate,  who  refuse 
even  the  wise  counsels  and  wholesome  admonitions  of 
reason,  who  listen  with  heedless  indiiferencc  to  the 
warning  voice  of  conscience,  and  to  the  faithful  but 
alarming  testimony  of  their  own  hearts,  and  who, 
notwithstanding  all  the  liglit,  and  aids,  and  encou- 
ragements they  possess,  may  say,  each  one  for  him- 
self, video  meliora  proboque,  dcteriora  sequor.  Such 
are  not  to  be  moved  by  any  representation  of  futu- 
rity. There  must  be  some  degree  of  thoughtful- 
ness  before  any  distant  prospects  will  be  made  to  re- 
llort  back  an  influence  that  will  be  felt.     If  the  sin- 


IkT.  v.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  36  Ir 

Tier  will  not  be  arrested  in  his  career  by  a  full  con- 
viction, that  every  sin  will  hereafter  bring  down  up- 
on him  a  punishment,  whose  intenseness  and  duration 
extend  to  the  utmost  reach  of  his  understanding,  it 
will  be  in  vain,  that  you  go  beyond  these  bounds,  and 
plunge  into  the  unfathomable  depths  of  eternity.  If 
you  intend  to  act  upon  the  human  mind,  you  must 
keep  within  its  sphere.  Hence  it  is,  that  the  doc- 
trine, which  represents  future  punishment  as  in  the 
higliest  degree  severe,  but  limited,  and  proportionate 
to  the  wickedness  of  men,  will  produce  all  the  effects, 
in  regard  to   practical  morals,  that  can  be  produced. 

According  to  this  scheme,  every  thing  is  credible, 
and  analagous  to  what  passes  in  this  life.  Every  one 
Avill  acknowledge,  that  the  wicked  should  suifer  in 
the  w^orld  to  come,  for  the  same  reasons,  that  they 
ought  to  suffer  in  the  present.  No  doubts  can  be 
entertained,  and  no  illusive  hopes  encouraged,  where 
it  is  deeply  felt,  that  every  sin  will  inevitably  be  pu- 
nished in  proportion  to  its  magnitude,  and  that  the 
justice  and  mercy  of  God  will  be  blended  in  all  his 
dealings  vv^ith  his  creatures. 

I  have  no  room  to  continue  the  parallel ;  but  it 
seems  to  me  from  the  above  brief  hints,  that  the 
interests  of  virtue  gain  nothing  from  the  doctrine  of 
eternal  misery,  which  would  not  be  gained  in  at  least 
an  equal  degree  from  the  other  doctrine;  and, 
therefore,  admitting  your  charge  to  be  just,  which  it 
certainly  is  not,  the  inference  you  would  draw,  in  re- 
gard to  the  moral  tendency  of  unitarian  preaching. 

amounts  to  nothing. 
46 


362  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  ir. 

As  to  the  doctrine  of  annihilation,  which  you  have 
charged  on  Unitarians,  I  shall  say  very  little.  The 
annihilation,  or  as  others  choose  to  call  it,  the  de- 
struction, of  the  wicked,  after  a  certain  period  of 
suifering,  has  been  believed  by  a  few  speculative  in- 
dividuals in  all  denominations  of  Christians.  Burnet 
represents  it  to  have  been  the  faith  of  Tatian,  Ire- 
naeus,  and  Arnobius.  "  The  souls  that  know  not 
God,"  says  Arnobius,  "  after  long  and  tedious  tor- 
ments, are  consumed  by  fire."*  Dr.  Watts  held, 
that  "  the  children  of  ungodly  parents,  who  die  in 
infancy,  are  annihilated."! 

There  is  no  justice  in  setting  out  this  doctrine  as 
a  branch  of  Unitarianism,  or  as  an  evidence  of  the 
mi  morality  of  Unitarians,  unless  proof  canr  be  addu- 
ced, that  it  is  a  necessary  part  of  their  faith,  or  at 
least  more  common  with  them,  than  with  Trinita- 
rians. This  cannot  be  done  ;  nor  has  the  doctrine 
any  connexion  with  Unitarianism.  Its  alliance  is  just 
as  close  with  the  faith  of  Trinitarians  as  of  Unita- 
rians ;  and  the  w^riters  against  it  have  usually  been 
of  the  latter  class. 

Dr.  John  Taylor,  and  Dr.  Price,  were  no  doubt 
destructionists;  and  Mr.  Bourn  has  probably  been  its 
most  zealous  defender.  Goadby  has  a  note  in  which 
he  seems  inclined  to  this  belief.J  These  were  Uni- 
tarians, it  is  true,  and  some  others  might  be  added 
to  the  list;  but  several  eminent  persons  of  the  same 

*  State  of  the  Dead,  duip.  X. 

t  Adam's  Religious  World  Displayed,  Vol.  III. )).  396. 

tGoadby's  Illustration  of  the  Scriptures,  Vol.  iii.  p.  lOOiJ. 


LET.  v.]  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  303 

denomination  have  argued  with  quite  as  much  zeal 
on  the  other  side.  Dr.  Chandler  had  a  controversy 
with  Mr.  Bourn  on  the  subject,  in  which  he  main- 
tained eternal  punishment.  Dr.  Cogan  confutes  the 
destruction  scheme  with  his  usual  acuteness  and 
force  ;*  Dr.  Estlin  has  written  expressly  against 
it;t  and  several  articles  have  appeared  in  the  Month- 
ly Repository  with  the  same  bearing.  The  doctrine 
was  not  believed  by  Locke,  Newton,  Priestley,  Jebb, 
Lindsey,  nor  any  of  the  more  celebrated  early  Eng- 
lish Unitarians.  It  is  an  injurious  insinuation,  there- 
fore, to  Impute  this  doctrine  to  Unltarianism,  or  to 
intimate  that  It  is  oftener  attached  to  persons  of  this 
belief,  than  to  those  of  the  various  shades  of  Trini- 
tarlanlsm.:{; 

But  in  any  case  it  could  hardly  be  supposed,  that 
it  would  be  held  up  as  defective  in  moral  Influence, 
especially  by  a  believer  in  eternal  torments.  It  sup- 
poses a  full  measure  of  punishment  to  be  inflicted  on 
every  soul,  before  it  shall  be  put  out  of  being,  and 
that  the  term  and  degree  of  this  punishment  will  be 
in  proportion  to  the  guilt  of  past  sins.  The  only  im- 
moral Influence,  which  it  would  seem  to  have,  is,  that 
it  casts  a  shadow  over  the  divine  goodness,  in  repre- 
senting God  as  destroying  a  portion  of  his  spiritual 

*Cogan''s  Theological  Disquisitions,  p.  361 — 439. 

tEstlin's  Discourses  on  Universal  Restitution,  p.  68, 

:j;  Miss  Hannah  Adams  has  failed  in  her  usual  accuracy  iu  attributing  this 
doctrine  to  the  Polish  Socinians,  as  is  plain  from  the  testimony  of  B.  Wisso- 
watius  before  quoted.  Hannah  Adams's  Dictionary  of  all  Beligions,  Ath  ed 
p.  274. 


364  MORAL  TENDENCY  OF  CALVINISM.  [part  iv. 

creatures,  towards  wliom  he  has  declared  his  love  to 
be  unchangeable,  and  whom  he  has  power  to  bless 
with  everlasting  happiness.  This  scheme  is  scarcely 
less  opposed  to  reason,  and  the  best  feelings  of  man, 
than  the  doctrine  of  eternal  misery,  and  its  advocates 
profess  to  build  it  exclusively  on  the  Scriptures. 

So  far  as  terror  is  a  motive  to  good  action,  as  Dr. 
Priestley  has  observed,  this  doctrine  must  certainly 
take  precedence  of  all  others.  What  idea  can  be 
more  dismal,  painful,  and  appalling,  than  that  of 
ceasing  to  exist,  after  suffering  the  acutest  misery  for 
an  indefinite  length  of  time  ?  Where  is  the  man, 
however  abandoned  in  wickedness,  however  lost  to 
a  sense  of  virtue  and  duty,  who,  with  all  his  crimes 
on  his  head,  would  not  feel  infinitely  more  comfort 
in  the  certainty  of  a  future  existence,  although  he 
must  suffer  the  just  punishment  of  his  sins,  than  he 
would  at  the  gloomy  thought  of  falling  into  nothing, 
and  of  being  forgotten  even  by  his  God  ?  Do  you 
believe  a  doctrine  can  be  preached  more  terrible  to 
the  sinner,  than  that  which  puts  him  beyond  the 
reach  of  infinite  mercy,  goodness,  and  love?  If  the 
conduct  of  men  is  to  be  regulated  by  terrific  repre- 
sentations of  the  future,  and  if  the  doctrine  of  eter- 
nal punishment  has  any  tendency  to  restrain  them 
from  vice,  this  must  act  with  double  force,  as  it  i^ 
doubly  awful  in  its  nature  and  its  prospects. 


PART  r. 


SENTIMENTS   AND    MORALS    OF    CELE- 
BRATED ENGLISH  UNITARIANS. 


LETTER  I. 

Theological  Sentiments  of  JVewton,  Locke^  and  Watts. 

SIR, 

In  the  closing  remarks  of  your  Letter,  strong  disap- 
probation is  expressed,  that  Unitarians  should  pre- 
sume to  rank  Newton,  Locke  and  Watts,  among  their 
numbers.  You  intimate  a  behef,  that  in  using  this 
freedom  with  the  two  former,  "  those  iUustrious  men 
are  treated  with  great  injustice  ;"  and  "  against  plac- 
ing the  pious,  the  heavenly-minded  Watts  in  such 
company,  you  feel  constrained  to  enter  your  solemn 
protest."  As  I  had  enumerated  these  men  among 
others,  wdio  were  not  believers  in  the  trinity,  and  as 
you  have  been  so  prompt  to  question  the  accuracy, 
and  even  the  justice  of  this  enumeration,  I  propose 
to  devote  a  few  words  to  a  consideration  of  this 
topic. 


566  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v. 

It  may  be  premised,  that  Unitarians  do  not  recur 
to  great  names  as  affording  any  proof  of  the  truth 
of  their  opinions.  Error  is  not  confined  to  the  igno- 
rant and  unwise,  nor  is  infallibihty  the  prerogative  of 
greatness.  In  rehgion  we  look  for  j9roo/'no where  but 
in  the  Scriptures.  The  authority  of  great  names 
ought,  doubtless,  to  have  its  weight,  not  in  convinc- 
ing us  in  opposition  to  the  word  of  God,  but  in  con- 
firming us  in  the  conclusions  to  which  we  have  come 
by  a  careful  inquiry.  Justice  to  ourselves,  as  well 
as  to  the  cause  we  support,  compels  us  to  recur  often 
to  the  names  of  distinguished  Unitarians.  It  is 
among  the  delights  of  our  adversaries  to  impress  it 
on  the  public  mind,  that  our  insignificance  must  ne- 
cessarily prove  us  heretics ;  that  our  opinions  are 
too  novel  to  be  true  ;  and  that  the  voice  of  all  the 
learned,  and  wise,  and  good,  speaks  loudly  against  us. 
This  string  is  harped  upon  incessantly.  No  matter 
how  false  and  discordant  its  notes,  so  long  as  their 
tone  is  sufficiently  high,  and  they  produce  the  de- 
sired effect  on  the  multitude.  Prejudices  grow  out 
of  these  errors.  We  desire  to  lessen  the  evil  by 
removing  the  cause.  We  wish  our  brethren  to  be 
enlightened,  to  know  the  truth,  and  to  have  as  few 
occasions  as  possible  for  uncharitableness  and  re- 
proach. We  are  influenced  by  a  double  motive, 
therefore,  in  referring  to  distinguished  names;  first, 
the  natural  desire  of  showing  that  our  faith  has  been 
embraced  and  supported  by  wise  and  excellent  men  ; 
and  secondly,  the  hope  of  softening  the  roughness, 
and  tempering  the  violence  of  those,  who  indulge  in 


J.ET.i.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  367 

a  license  of  obloquy  and  disparagement,  which,  we 
are  willing  to  believe,  is  more  the  result  of  igno- 
rance, than  of  a  wicked  disposition. 

Let  it  be  further  observed,  that  in  the  cases  of 
Newton  and  Locke,  the  labour  of  [)roof  belongs  to 
Trinitarians.  These  men  have  always  been  classed 
with  Unitarians  ;  they  have  been  perpetually  quoted 
on  that  side  of  the  question,  nor  have  I  ever  heard 
of  their  authority  being  brought  forward  in  favour 
of  the  trinity,  or  even  of  orthodoxy.  Prove  from 
their  writings,  or  from  the  writings  of  their  cotem- 
poraries,  or  from  any  well  established  facts,  that 
they  were  Trinitarians,  and  the  point  will  be  settled. 
The  persons,  who  manifest  so  lively  a  concern  for 
what  they  profess  to  deem  the  injured  reputation  of 
these  great  men,  have  exhibited  no  proof  to  this 
effect.  Until  this  be  done,  Newton  and  Locke  must 
be  considered  Unitarians,  as  they  always  have  been. 
I  am  not  disposed,  however,  to  decline  an  investiga- 
tion of  some  of  the  positive  evidences  of  the  fact. 
The  inquiry  must  necessarily  be  confined  to  a  nar- 
row space. 

Sir  Isaac  Newton  was  one  of  the  first,  who  for- 
mally engaged  in  proving  the  spuriousness  of  the 
famous  text  of  the  three  heavenly  witnesses,  1  John 
V.  7  ;  and  also  in  showing  that  the  received  reading 
of  1  Tim.  iii.  16,  is  a  corruption.*     This  subject  was 


*  In  regard  to  1  Tim.  iii.  16,  Nowton  was  of  tlio  same  opinion  as  Dr.  Sa- 
muel Clarke.  Instead  of  God  manifest  in  the  ftsh,  he  believed  the  true 
reading  to  be,  He  ivho,  or  that  which  ivas  vianifr.sl  in  the  Jhsh.  "  All  the  old 
rersions,"  says  Dr.  Clarke,  "  have  it  qui  or  quod.     And  all  the   ancient  Fa 


368  SENTIMENTS  AND  MQRALS  [/-art  v. 

discussed  in  two  letters  said  to  have  been  written  to 
Le  Clerc.  The  language  and  arguments  are  precisely 
such  as  would  be  used  by  Unitarians,  and  such 
as  Trinitarians  of  that  day,  before  the  controver- 
sy touching  those  passages  had  been  much  agitated, 
could  not  be  supposed  to  have  employed.  In  ad- 
verting to  the  testimony  of  Cyprian,  Newton  ob- 
serves, that  "  he  does  not  say,  the  Father,  the  Word, 
and  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  in  1  John,  v.  7,  but  the  Fa- 
ther^ the  So7i,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  it  is  in  Bap- 
tism, the  place  from  which  they  at  first  tried  to  derive 
the  trinitij.^'"^  Do  you  believe  this  language  ever 
escaped  from  a  Trinitarian?  Instead  of  indicating 
any  confidence  in  the  doctrine  of  the  trinity,  does  it 
not  strongly  imply  that  the  advocates  of  this  doctrine 
have  TRIED  in  vain  to  find  it  in  a  text,  to  which  they 
have  universally  resorted  as  a  strong  hold  ?  The 
person,  who  can  read  these  Letters  with  an  unshak- 
en conviction,  that  the  author  was  not  an  antitrinita- 


thers,  though  the  copies  of  many  of  them  have  it  now  in  the  text  itself,  flsjf, 
Deus,  yet  from  the  tenour  of  their  comments  upon  it,  and  from  their  never 
citing  it  in  the  Avian  controversy,  it  appears  they  always  read  it  qui  or  quod,'''' 
Scripture  Doctrine  of  the.  Trinity,  p.  88.  Third  Edit.  Mill  says,  this  text 
was  never  quoted  as  proof  of  Christ's  divinity,  till  the  year  380,  and  then  first 
by  Gregory  Nyssen. — Gregorius  Nyssenus  primus  omnium,  &c. 

*  See  Newton's  works,  Horseley's  Edition,  vol.  v.  p.  498.  In  a  note  to  this 
passage  Bishop  Horseley  observes,  "  The  insinuation  contained  in  this  ex- 
pression, that  the  trinity  is  not  to  be  derived  from  the  words  prescribed  for  the 
baptismal  form,  is  very  extraordinary  to  come  from  a  writer  who  is  no  Soci- 
nian."  The  extreme  disingenuousness  of  this  note  is  too  obvious  to  require 
remark.  By  a  Socinian,  Bishop  Horseley  means  a  person,  who  denies  the  tri- 
nity ;  and  Newton's  language  would  be  "  extraordinary"  indeed,  if  he  believ- 
ed in  a  trinity.  Horseley  saw  too  clearly,  that  the  only  inference  was,  that 
he  did  not  believe  in  it.  Let  charity  assign  as  good  a  motive  as  it  can  for  this 
insidious  not"^. 


J.ET.  1.]  OF   ENGLISH   (JiMTAKIAJXS.  369 

rian,  must  have  a  rule  of  deciding  tlie  meaning  of  a 
writer  from  his  language,  which  few  will  apprehend. 
In  referring  again  to  the  text  in  John,  Newton 
says,  "  Let  them  make  good  sense  of  it  Avho  are 
able.  For  my  part,  I  can  make  none.  If  it  be  said, 
that  we  are  not  to  determine  what  is  scripture,  and 
what  not,  by  our  own  private  judgments,  I  confess  it 
in  places  not  controverted.  But  in  disputable  points. 
I  love  to  take  up  with  what  I  can  best  understand.  It 
is  the  temper  of  the  hot  and  superstitious  part  of  man- 
kind^ in  matters  of  religion.,  ever  to  be  fond  of  myste- 
ries ;  and.,  for  that  reason.,  to  like  best  what  they  under- 
stand least.  Such  men  use  the  Apostle  John  as  they 
please  ;  but  I  have  that  honour  for  him,  as  to  be- 
lieve, that  he  wrote  good  sense,  and,  therefore,  take 
that  sense  to  be  his,  which  is  the  best,  especially 
since  I  am  defended  in  it  by  so  great  an  authority."* 
It  is  readily  admitted,  that  these  words  might  be 
spoken  by  a  Trinitarian.  It  must,  nevertheless,  be 
granted,  that  it  is  a  kind  of  language,  which  no  one 
of  that  faith  has  been  known  to  use.  The  senti- 
ments it  inculcates  are  peculiar  to  Unitarians,  and  are 
continually  attacked  by  their  opponents  with  almost 
as  much  harshness,  as  their  views  of  the  trinity  it- 
self. The  trinity  is  a  mystery,  and  if  that  doctrine 
is  to  have  the  preference,  which  we  "can  best  un- 
derstand," who  win  ever  be  a  Trinitarian  ?t 

*  Newton's  Works,  Vol.  v.  p.  529. 

tin  Newton's  remarks  on  the  Book  of  Revelations,  lie  speaks  as  follows  ; 
"  As  the  few  and  obscure  prophecies  concerning  Christ's  first  coming  were  for 
the  setting  up  of  the  christian  religion,  ivliick  ALL  nations  have  since  corrupl- 

47 


370  SENTIMEJNTS  AINU  WOKALS  [part  v. 

It  is  known,  that  Erasmus  received  the  text  of  the 
three  witnesses  into  his  Testament  on  the  authority 
of  a  single  manuscript  in  England.  He  doubted  the 
value  of  this  manuscript,  and  wrote  much  against  it. 
Newton  says,  that  his  adversaries  in  England  never 
answered  his  accusations,  "  but,  on  the  contrary, 
when  they  had  got  the  Trinity  into  his  edition^  they 
threw  by  their  manuscript,  if  they  had  one,  as  an 
almanac  out  of  date."*  It  may  be  doubted  whe- 
ther a  Trinitarian  would  have  thus  spoken. 

When  Sir  Isaac  Newton  was  Master  of  the  Mint, 
the  office  of  Assay  Master  was  filled  by  Mr.  Hopton 
Haynes.  This  gentleman  was  a  Unitarian,  and  wrote 
with  much  ability  and  learning  a  treatise  on  the  subject, 
which  has  recently  been  several  times  re'published.t 
Mr.  Haynes,  who  was  long  and  intimately  acquainted 
Avith  Newton,  declared  to  a  friend,f  that  "  he  did  not 
believe  our  Lord's  pre-existence,  being  a  Socinian,  as 
Ave  call  it,  in  that  article  ;  and  that  Sir  Isaac  much 
lamented  Dr.  Clarke's  embracing  Arianism,  which 
opinion  he  feared  had  been,   and   still   Avould  be,  if 


cd ;  so  the  many  and  clear  prophecies  concerning  the  things  to  be  done  at 
Clirist's  second  coming,  arc  not  only  for  predicting,  but  also  for  effecting  a  re- 
ciirery  of  tJic  long-lost  trulh.'"'  Ibid.  449.  What  is  the  corruption  here  spoken 
of,  and  wliat  is  the  long-lost  truth  ?  Read  Priestley's  History  of  Early  Opi- 
nions, and  of  the  Corruptions  of  Christianity,  and  you  will  discover  the  senti- 
ments of  Unitarians  on  the  subject,  which  I  have  no  doubt  were  the  senti- 
ments of  Newton. 

*  Ibid.  p.  530. 

t  This  work  is  called  a  Scripture  Account  of  the  Attributes  and  Worship  of 
God,  and  of  the  Character  and  Offices  of  Jesus  Christ. 

X  The  Rev.  Richard  Baron,  "  a  person  of  great  probity  and  public  spirit., 
ahid  known  by  many  valuable  publications." 


LET.  I.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  371 

maintained  by  learned  men,  a  great  obstruction  to  the 
progress  of  Christianity."*  This  declaration  is  alone 
amply  sufficient.  It  was  made  by  a  man  who  would 
not  be  likely  to  mistake.  I  am  aware  of  Magee's 
insinuations,  that  Haynes  and  Baron  were  Unitarians, 
and  therefore  not  to  be  trusted ;  but  I  am  also  aware 
of  many  other  insinuations  of  his  not  less  gross  or  il- 
liberal. When  Unitarianism  is  concerned,  no  man  is 
more  fruitful  in  sneers  and  low  ridicule,  none  more 
barren  in  argument  and  fact.  In  the  present  instance, 
as  in  many  others,  his  poisoned  arrows  rebound  upon 
himself.  As  he  has  substituted  sneers  for  reasons,  it 
is  plain  enough  that  no  reasons  were  at  hand.  An 
impartial  and  unbiassed  writer  has  said  of  Haynes,  in 
speaking  of  his  general  character,  without  allusion  to 
his  theological  opinions,  "  that  he  always  behaved 
himself  highly  worthy  of  the  great  trust  reposed  in 
him,  being  indefatigable  and  most  faithful  in  the  ex- 
ecution of  his  offices  ;"  and  adds,  "  We  may  conclude, 
from  his  being  in  the  Mint,  at  the  time  Sir  Isaac 
Newton  presided  there,  and  from  his  known  piety 
and  love  of  learned  conversation,  that  he  had  fre- 
quent intercourse  and  enjoyed  the  good  opinion  of 
that  excellent  man."t  The  probability,  that  an  in- 
timacy  and  a  similarity  of  opinion  existed  between 
them,  is  also  strengthened  by  the  fact   mentioned  in 

*  See  the  Preface  to  the2cl  edition  of  Haynes's  Scripture  Account,  p.  vii. 

t  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  vol.  ii.  p.  140,  141,  as  cited  by  Dr.  Carpen- 
ter, and  iu  Mr.  Aspland's  Preface  to  the  4th  edition  of  the  Scripture  Ac- 
count. 


372  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v 

Wetstcin's  Prolegomena,  that  Haynes  translated  the 
Two  Letters  above  mentioned  into  Latin.* 

There  is  yet  another  argument  directly  in  point, 
and  in  my  mind  an  unanswerable  one.  It  is  well 
known,  that  Newton  left  several  papers  on  theologi- 
cal subjects,  Avhich  have  never  been  permitted  to 
come  before  the  Avorld.  They  were  cautiously  ex- 
cluded from  Horsley's  large  edition  of  his  works. 
These  papers  have  been  said  to  contain  more  at 
large  the  author's  views  of  the  Unitarian  system  ; 
nor  has  this  report  been  contradicted  by  the  per- 
sons Avho  hold  the  papers  in  their  possession.     It  was 

*  Whiston  says,  tliat  Sir  Isaac  Newton  was  a  Eusebian,  or  Arinn,  but  he 
does  not  seem  to  have  been  intimately  acquainted  with  his  particular  views. 
Whiston  was  many  years  on  friendly  terms  with  Newton,  and  his  testimony  is 
abundant,  that  he  did  not  consider  him  a  Trinitarian.  VVhislons  Memoirs  of 
Himself,  Fo/.  I.  p.  206. 

Whiston  drew  up  an  abstract  of  his  reply  to  Newton's  Chronology,  which 
was  published  in  a  periodical  work  of  that  day,  entitled  The  Present  S/ate  of 
the  Republic  of  Letters,  This  abstract  is  contained  in  the  number  for  April, 
1729,  about  two  years  after  Sir  Isaac  Newton's  death.  Among  other  things 
Whiston  has  a  good  deal  to  say  respecting  Newton's  opinions  concerning  the 
trinity,  and  states  expressly,  that  he  had  early  discovered  that  doctrine  to  be 
a  corruption,  which  crept  into  the  christian  church  in  the  primitive  ages.  He 
intimates,  also,  that  Newton  had  left  several  papers  on  this  subject. 

Near  the  close  of  the  article  he  observes;  <'  I  now  beg  leave  before  I  con- 
clude, to  address  myself  to  the  remainder  of  those  heads  of  colleges,  and  of 
those  members  both  of  Convocation,  and  of  the  late  Court  of  Delegates,  who 
banished  and  persecuted  me  for  pretended  ficres^t/,  the  pretended  Arianhereay ; 
and  to  put  them  in  mind,  that  they  banished,  they  persecuted  me  for  the  very 
same  christian  doctrines,  that  the  great  Sir  Isaac  J^ewton  had  discovered  and 
embraced mani/ years  beforetne  ; — and  for  which  christian  doctrines,  had  ho  ven- 
tured as  plainly  and  openly  to  publish  them  to  the  world  as  I  thought  myself 
obliged  to  do  my  own  discoveriee,  they  must,  thirty  or  forty  years  ago,  have 
expelled  and  persecuted  the  great  Sir  Isaac  Newton  also."  Republic  of  Let- 
icrs,  Vol.  III.  p.  277 — 286.  Let  it  be  remembered,  that  Whiston  was  intimately 
acquainted  with  Newton  for  more  than  thirty  years. 


i.BT.  I.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  373 

not  contradicted  by  Horslej,  who  examined  the 
papers,  and  declared  them  unsuitable  for  pubhcation. 
What  could  Horsley  find  in  any  theological  writings 
of  Sir  Isaac  Newton,  which  he  deemed  proper  to 
keep  in  the  dark  ?  This  question  has  been  answered 
in  conformity  with  the  common  sense  of  mankind,  by 
a  writer,  who  cannot  be  supposed  to  have  spoken 
from  interested  motives.  "  Newton's  religious  opi- 
nions were  not  orthodox.  For  example,  he  did  not 
believe  in  the  trinity.  This  gives  us  the  reason  why 
Horsley,  the  champion  of  the  trinity,  found  New- 
ton's papers  unfit  for  publication.  But  it  is  much  to 
be  regretted,  that  they  have  never  seen  the  light."* 
A  very  large  portion  of  these  papers,  as  stated  by 
the  executors,  were  on  religious  subjects.  Among 
others  never  published  was  an  account  of  corruptions 
of  scripture,  and  more  than  seventy  folio  sheets  con- 
taining paradoxical  questions  concerning  Athanasius.t 

*  Thompson's  History  of  the  Royal  Society,  p.  283, — Annals  of  Philosop/ii/j 
vol.  ii.  p.  322;  as  quoted  by  Mardon. 

+  An  imperfect  copy  of  Newton's  History  of  Two  Notable  Corruptions  of 
Scripture  first  appeared  in  London,  1754,  under  the  title  ol  Two  Letters  to  Le 
Clerc.  In  the  author's  manuscript,  Bishop  Horsley  says  they  are  not  ad- 
dressed to  any  particular  person,  although  conceived  in  the  epistolary  form. 
The  follovvinii,  paragraph,  translated  from  Wetstein,  contains  some  curious 
facts,  by  which  it  appears,  that  Le  Clerc  received  them  from  Locke  without 
knowing  who  was  their  real  author. 

"  The  illustrious  Sir  Isaac  Newton,"  says  Wetstein,  "  wrote  two  letters  in 
English  concerning  the  true  reading  of  the  texts  1  John,  v.  7,  8 ;  and  1  Tim. 
iii.  16,  in  which  by  his  critical  sagacity,  his  diligence,  and  the  abundance  of 
his  materials  collected  from  every  quarter,  from  manuscripts,  versions,  the 
Latin  and  Greek  Fathers,  and  indeed  from  the  whole  compass  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal history,  he  has  so  completely  established  his  point,  as  to  reduce  it  almost 
to  a  mathematical  certainly.  He  has  accomplished  what  would  seem  next 
to  impossible  for  a  man,  whose  former  studies  had  been  so  remote  from  this 
kind  of  learning. 


374  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [fart  v. 

I  will  only  add,  that  Dr.  Chalmers  has  confessed 
his  belief  In  the  unitarian  sentiments  of  Newton — 
awkwardly  enough,  to  be  sure,  but  still  it  is  a  confes- 
sion— and  this,  after  making  him  not  only  the  great- 
est and  Avisest  philosopher,  but  the  acutest  and 
profoundest  theologian,  whom   the  world  has  seen.* 

"  These  letters  were  copied  out  by  Locke,  with  his  own  hand,  and  sent  to 
Le  Clerc,  who  mentioned  them  in  the  year  1708,  in  a  preface  to  Mill's  New 
Testament  edited  by  Kuster.  These  are  the  words  of  Le  Clerc.  '  I  have 
in  my  possession  an  elegant  dissertation  in  English,  which  defends  the  Vulgate 
reading  of  1  Tim.  iii.  16.  [that  is,  quod  instead  of  Deus.}  I  know  not  by 
whom  this  treatise  was  written,  but  it  was  transmitted  to  me  sometime  ago  by 
the  celebrated  Mr.  Locke.  It  is  worthy  to  see  the  light,  and  perhaps  would  al- 
ready have  been  published,  if  it  had  been  rendered  into  Latin.'  After  the 
death  of  Le  Clerc,  these  two  epistles,  with  a  parcel  of  other  letters  written  to 
him,  were  committed  to  my  custody,  that  they  might  be  deposited  in  the  li- 
brary of  the  Remonstrants.  As  they  were  mutilated  at  the  be'ginning  and  end, 
I  made  several  attempts  to  obtain  from  the  heirs  of  Newton  the  deficient  parts, 
that  our  copy  might  be  perfect.  But  I  did  not  succeed,  although  I  understood 
they  had  complete  copies,  bpth  in  English,  and  the  Latin  translation  of  Hop- 
ton  Haynes.  These  two  epistles  are  mentioned  by  Whistoji  and  Berriman." 
Wtlst.  Prolcgom.  p.  185. 

From  the  above  account  we  learn,  that  this  elegant  tract,  one  of  the  most 
laboured  and  learned  of  all  Newton's  productions,  would  never  have  been 
made  public,  if  the  mutilated  copy  from  Holland  had  not  first  anpeared  in 
London,  more  than  fifty  years  after  it  was  written,  and  induced  the  heirs  of 
Newton  to  give  a  corrected  copy  from  the  author's  manuscript.  The  persons 
appointed  by  Newton's  executors  to  examine  his  papers  tell  us  of  "  fifty  one 
half  sheets  in  folio,  being  an  Historical  ./Account  of  Two  JVotable  Corruptions  of 
Scripture,^\vh'ich  in  the  mass  of  many  others  they  "judged  not  fit  to  be  print- 
ed," as  testified  by  their  minutes  of  this  examination.  The  truth  is,  the  time 
in  which  they  were  employed  in  looking  over  Newton's  unpublished  papers 
was  not  more  than  sufficient  to  ascertain  their  subjects,  and  the  number  of 
sheets.  In  three  days  tiiey  examined,  judged,  and  condemned  an  immense 
body  of  papers,  which  had  employed  the  deepest  thoughts  of  Newton  for  half 
a  century.  See  an  account  of  the  Works  and  Papers  of  JVewton  in  the  Edin- 
burgh Enci/clopedia,  Amer.  Edit.  Vol.  XIV,  p.  486. 

*  Compare  the  Preface  to  Dr.  Chalmers''  Astronomical  Discourses  with  the 
second  sermon  in  the  course.  See  likewise  Unitarian  Miscellany,  vol.  i. 
p.  167. 

For  further  information  respecting  the  sentiments  of  Newton,  consult  Mai- 


?,ET.  I.]  OK  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  375 

Concerning  the  opinions  of  Locke  I  have  but  lit- 
tle to  say.  The  main  point  in  question  is  sufficiently 
settled  by  a  single  fact,  which  is,  that  pubHc  senti- 
ment has  invariably  ranked  him  among  Unitarians, 
and  no  one  has  succeeded  in  proving  this  sentiment 
erroneous.  I  know  what  Magee  and  Bishop  Bur- 
gess have  attempted  to  do,  and  I  also  know  what  they 
have  totally  failed  to  accomplish.  They  were  wil- 
ling to  believe,  like  yourself,  that  Locke  was  "  treat- 
ed with  great  injustice,"  by  having  Unitarianism  im- 
puted to  him,  and  they  generously  undertook  the 
labour  of  freeing  him  from  this  imputation.  They 
read  his  works,  and  no  doubt  with  all  the  fidelity  and 
zeal,  Avhich  their  concern  for  his  reputation  demand- 
ed. They  made  quotations,  but  to  what  did  they 
amount?  To  nothing,  indeed,  which  advances  their 
purpose.  They  have  not  been  able  to  discover  a 
fact,  hint,  or  allusion,  Avhich  warrants  the  inference, 
that  Locke  believed  in  a  trinity.  In  relation  to  this 
doctrine,  they  have  not  quoted  a  syllable  to  which 
Unitarians  generally  will  not  assent.  Is  not  the  con- 
clusion from  these  particulars  directly  the  contrary 
of  that,  Avhich  Magee  and  Burgess  would  establish. 
And  if  they  have  failed,  who  will  undertake  the 
task?* 


don's  Letter  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Chalmers  ;  and   Carpenters  examination  of  Ma- 
gee's  Charges  against  Unitarians  and  Unitarianism,  p.  102. 

*  Prebendary  Dennis  gravely  cited  a  work  called,  Lockers  Common  Placr 
Book  to  the  Bible,  as  a  proof  that  he  was  a  Trinitarian.  Others,  perhaps, 
may  have  been  influenced  by  the  same  authority.  This  book  was  first  pub- 
lished in  1763.     It  was  afterwards  enlarged,  and  by  a  species  of  pious  imna- 


376  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v_ 

Locke  has  written  largely  upon  the  christian  reli- 
gion. The  primary  object  of  his  Reasonableness  of' 
Christianity  was  to  ascertain  the  kind  of  faith  ne- 
cessary to  make  a  man  a  christian.  But  in  the 
course  of  this  investigation  he  exhibits,  with  some 
degree  of  minuteness,  his  views  of  the  christian  dis- 
pensation. In  his  two  Vindications  he  expresses  his 
thoughts  more  at  length,  and  dwells  particularly  on 
what  his  opponents  called  fundamentals,  and  charged 
him  with  omitting.  This  list  of  fundamentals  is  in 
close  resemblance  to  the  one  you  have  drawn  up,  as 
containing  articles  essential  to  the  faith  of  any  per- 
son, who  would  be  entitled  to  the  name  of  christian. 
Locke  denied,  that  any  such  articles  were  necessary, 
and  maintained  what  he  had  asserted  and'  proved  in 
his  Reasonableness  of  Christianity,  that  one  essential 
article  of  faith  only  was  preached  by  the  Saviour 
and  his  apostles,  namely,  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah, 
the  Son  of  God.  Whoever  professed  this  faith  was 
considered  a  member  of  Christ's  church.  Locke 
has  also  left  an  elaborate  paraphrase  and  commenta- 
ry on  four  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles.  In  all  these  writ- 
ings nothing  appears,  which  shows  the  author  to  have 
had  any  leaning  towards  the  doctrine  of  a  trinity, 
or  any  other  of  the  doctrines  of  high  orthodoxy. 
Does  not  this  amount  to  a  demonstration,  that  he 
believed  in    none  of   these    things?     Was   it   ever 

sition  was  sent  out  under  the  name  of  Mr.  Locke.  Notwithstanding  it  has  al- 
ways been  known  to  be  spurious,  it  is  still  published  as  Ijockc's,  with  a  pre- 
tace  ascribed  to  him,  which,  as  Bishop  Law  has  said,  "  is  neither  sense  nor 
Enelish." 


r,Et.  I.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  371' 

known,  that  a  Trinitarian  has  written  expressly  on 
the  fundamental  articles,  without  in  any  shape  em- 
bracing the  distinguishing  doctrine  of  his  faith  ?  It 
is  presumed  not.  Consult  Locke's  interpretation  of 
those  texts  in  the  Epistles  usually  quoted  in  support 
of  the  trinity.  In  no  case  will  you  discover  any  ten- 
dency to  this  doctrine.* 

The  facts  here  stated  are  conclusive.  They  con- 
stitute an  argument,  which  can  be  overthrown  only 
by  positive  evidence,  that  Locke  was  a  Trinitarian. 
Let  this  be  produced,  and  the  controversy  will  be  at 
an  end. 

I  have  room  for  no  more  than  two  or  three  quota- 
tions from  Locke's  works.  It  will  appear  from  these, 
however,  that  the  principles^  by  which  he  was  guid- 
ed in  explaining  the  religion  of  the  Saviour,  and  in- 
terpreting the  word  of  God,  are  in  all  respects  the 
same  as  those  of  Unitarians. 

In  the  first  place,  he  believed  the  truths  revealed 
by  Jesus  to  be  adapted  to  the  understanding;  that 
all  men,  the  simple  as  well  as  the  wise,  "  are  con- 
cerned in  this  religion,  and  ought  to  understand  it,  in 
order  to  their  salvation."  For  thus  declaring  reli- 
gion to  be  an  intelligible  things  he  drew  upon  him 
the  censure  and  sneers  of  his  adversary.     In  reply, 

*  Examine  particularly  the  famous  text  of  Rom.  ix.  5.  which  Trinitarians 
consider  so  strong  in  their  favour.  Locke's  paraphrase  gives  it  a  meaning 
wholly  irrelevant  to  their  purpose.  Instead  of  the  rendering  of  the  common 
version,  which  reads  as  follows,  "Christ  came,  who  is  over  all,  God  blessed 
for  ever,"  Locke  renders  it,  "  Christ  is  come,  he  who  is  over  all,  God  be  bles- 
sed for  ever." 

48 


378  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v. 

he  said,  "  I  hope  it  is  no  derogation  to  the  christian 
religion  to  say,  that  the  fundamentals  of  it,  that  is,  all 
that  is  necessary  to  be  believed  in  it,  by  all  men,  is 
easy  to  be  understood  by  all  men.  This  I  thought 
myself  authorized  to  say,  by  the  very  easy  and  very 
intelligible  articles  insisted  on  by  our  Saviour  and  his 
Apostles  ;  which  contain  nothing  but  what  could  be 
understood  by  the  bulk  of  mankind."*  Now  I  would 
ask,  whether  the  trinity  be  a  "  very  easy  and  a  very 
intelligible  article,"  and  whether  it  "  contains  nothing 
which  may  not  be  understood  by  the  bulk  of  man- 
kind ?"  I  would  also  ask,  whether  the  principles 
here  assumed  by  Locke  be  not  at  variance  with  those 
universally  received  and  acted  upon  by  Trinitarians  ?f 
Furthermore,  do  not  all  believers  in  the  trinity- 
consider  this  doctrine  of  the  highest  importance,  and 
a  necessary  article  of  faith?  Do  they  not  all  contend, 
that  it  was  preached  by  the  Saviour  and  his  Apos- 
tles 7  But  Locke  virtually  denied  both  of  these  pro- 
positions. He  asserted,  that  Jesus  and  the  Apostles 
preached  only  one  article  as  essential,  which  was  the 


*  Vindication  of  the  Reasonableness  of  Christianity ;  Locke's  Works,  elev- 
enth edition,  Vol.  vii.  p.  176.  See  also  Locke's  viev/s  of  this  subject  in  the 
Chapter  on  Faith  and  Reason,  in  his  Essay  on  the  Human  Understanding, 
Book  iv.  c.  18. 

t  In  the  year  1781,  a  book  was  published  in  England  by  a  Mr.  Milner,  de- 
ploring the  calamities,  which  were  about  to  come  upon  the  world,  by  introduc- 
ing human  reason  into  religion.  Mr.  Locke  is  made  the  great  offender,  and 
in  alluding  to  him,  the  writer  utters  the  following  lamentations.  "Reason 
lias  impertinently  meddled  with  the  Ciospel,  and  that  with  such  overbearing 
credulity,  as  to  darken  it  more  and  more  ;  and  rivers  of  tears  would  not  suffice 
10  bewail  the  increase  of  moral  misery,  whicli,  since  Mr.  Locke's  time,  has 
))crvaded  these  kingdoms."  And  again  ;"  it  was  Mr.  Locke,  who  first,  un- 
happily, gave  reason  leave  to  intrude  herself  into  the  secrets  of  Christianity." 


LET.  I.J  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  .'^79 

Messiahship  of  Jesus.  Hear  what  he  says  in  reply 
to  his  opponents,  who  charged  him  with  being  a  So- 
cinian,  because  he  omitted  the  trinity  and  its  collate- 
ral doctrines.  "  Did  he  amiss,"  he  asks,  alluding  to 
himself,  "  that  he  offered  to  the  belief  of  those,  who 
stood  off,  that  and  only  that,  which  our  Saviour  and 
his  Apostles  preached,  for  the  reducing  the  uncon- 
verted world  ;  and  would  any  one  think  he  in  earnest 
Avent  about  to  persuade  men  to  be  christians,  who 
should  use  that  as  an  argument  to  recommend  the 
Gospel,  which  he  has  observed  men  to  lay  hold  on, 
as  an  objection  against  it?  To  urge  such  points  of 
controversy,  as  necessary  articles  of  faith,  when  we 
see  our  Saviour  and  the  Apostles,  in  their  preaching, 
urged  them  not  as  necessary  to  he  believed  to  make  men 
christians,  is,  by  our  own  authority,  to  add  prejudices 
to  prejudices,  and  to  block  our  own  way  to  those 
men,  whom  we  Avould  have  access  to,  and  prevail  up- 
on."* Can  any  thing  be  plainer  than  this  passage  ? 
He  tells  you,  that  he  had  not  enforced  the  doctrines, 
for  the  omission  of  which  he  was  charged  with  the 
heresy  of  Socinianism,  because,  "  our  Saviour  and  the 
Apostles  urged  them  not  as  necessary  to  be  believed, 
to  make  men  christians."  The  trinity  was  one  of 
these  doctrines.  What  is  the  inference,  if  it  be  not, 
that  Locke  did  not  believe  the  trinity  to  have  been 
preached  by  the  Saviour  and  his  Apostles?t 

*  Vindication,  &c.  Works,  vol.  vii.  p.  164. 

t  I  cannot  forbear  quoting  in  this  place,  a  passage  from  Locke's  Reasonable- 
ness of  Christianity,  which  presents  in  clear  terms  the  substance  of  his  views 
respecting  essential  articles  of  faith.     He  states,  "  that  above  threescore  year* 


380  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v. 

Some  persons  seem  to  have  deceived  themselves 
in  regard  to  Locke's  opinions,  by  not  giving  a  proper 
attention  to  the  object  of  his  reasonings,  especially  in 
his  two  Vindications.  When  the  Reasonableness  of 
Christianity  appeared,  it  was  furiously  attacked  by 
Edwards,  in  a  treatise  called  Socinianism  Unmasked^ 
and  charged  not  only  with  inculcating  Socinianism, 
but  even  the  desolating  tenets  of  deism  and  atheism. 
The  Vindications  were  written  in  reply  to  Edwards, 


after  our  Saviour's  passion,  St.  John  knew  nothing  else  required  to  be  believed 
lor  the  attaining  of  life,  but  that '  Jesus  is  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  God,'"  and 
then  goes  on  to  add  the  following  words ; 

"  To  this  it  is  likely  it  will  be  objected  by  some,  that  to  believe  only  that  Je- 
sus of  Nazareth  is  the  Messiah,  is  but  an  historical,  and  not  a  justifying,  or 
saving  faith. 

"  To  which  I  answer,  that  I  allow  to  the  makers  of  systenfs  and  their  fol- 
lowers, to  invent  and  use  what  distinctions  they  please,  and  to  call  things  by 
»vhat  names  they  think  fit.  But  I  cannot  allow  to  them,  or  to  any  man,  an 
authority  to  make  a  religion  for  me,  or  to  alter  that  which  God  hath  revealed. 
And  if  they  please  to  call  the  believing  that,  which  our  Saviour  and  his  Apos- 
tles preached,  and  proposed  alone  to  be  believed,  an  historical  faith,  they  have 
their  liberty;  but  they  must  have  a  care,  how  they  deny  it  to  be  a  justifyin;^ 
or  saving  faith,  when  our  Saviour  and  his  Apostles  have  declared  it  so  to  be, 
and  taught  no  other,  which  men  should  receive,  and  whereby  they  should  be 
made  believers  unto  eternal  life  ;  unless  they  can  so  far  make  bold  with  our 
Saviour,  for  the  sake  of  their  beloved  systems,  as  to  say,  that  he  forgot  what 
he  came  into  the  world  for,  and  that  he  and  his  Apostles  did  not  instruct  peo- 
ple right  in  the  way  and  mysteries  of  salvation. 

"For  that  this  is  the  sole  doctrine  pressed  and  required  to  be  believed  in  the 
whole  tenour  of  our  Saviour's  and  his  Apostles' preaching,  we  have  showed 
through  the  whole  history  of  the  Evangelists  and  the  Acts.  And  I  challenge 
them  to  show,  tiiat  there  was  an}'  other  doctrine,  upon  their  assent  to  which, 
men  were  pronounced  believers  or  unbelievers,  and  accordingly  received  into 
the  church  of  Christ,  as  members  of  his  body,  as  far  as  mere  believing  could 
jnake  them  so  ;  or  else  kept  out  of  it.  This  was  the  only  gospel  article  of 
faith,  which  was  preached  to  them.  And  if  nothing  else  was  preached  every 
where,  the  Apostle's  argument  will  hold  against  any  other  articles  of  faith  to 
be  believed  under  the  Gospel.  '  How  shall  they  believe  that  whereof  they 
have  not  heard  ?'    Rom.  x.  14.     For  to  preach  any  other  doctrines  necessary 


I,ET.  I.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  381 

and  conducted  in  a  masterly  train  of  logical  reason- 
ings, aiming  at  one  point  only,  which  was  to  disprove 
the  charge  of  a  tendency  to  the  peculiar  tenets  of 
Socinianism,  and  to  irreligion  in  the  Reasonableness  of 
Christianity.  In  doing  this,  Locke  had  no  occasion 
to  bring  forward  and  explain  his  own  opinions  on  all 
the  topics  embraced  in  the  controversy.  It  was  his 
sole  object  to  show  the  disingenuousness  of  his  ad- 
versary in  making  charges,  and  drawing  inferences, 
totally  unwarranted  by  any  thing  in  the  work,  which 
he  was  pretending  to  examine.  It  was  no  part  of 
his  purpose  to  make  known  the  tenets  of  his  faith, 
but  to  show  that  the  objections  made  against  his 
book,  on  account  of  its  supposed  irreligious  tendency, 
were  ill  natured  and  unfounded. 

Bishop  Stillingfleet  had  the  acuteness  to  discover, 
as  he  imagined,  a  secret  attack  on  the  trinity,  even  in 
the  Essay  on  the  Human  Understanding.  Locke,  in 
his  reply,  does  not  say  that  he  believes  in  the  trinity, 
and  that  therefore  the  bishop's  insinuations  are  false, 
but  goes  on  to  repel  tlie  charges,  by  showing  that 
the  book  has  nothing  (o  do  with  the  trinity,  and  is 
gratuitously  dragged  into  the  controversy.  These 
facts  explain  the  reason  why  Locke  was  less  explicit 
on  many  topics,  than  would  be  expected,  if  he  were 
explaining  and  defending  his  own  tenets.* 

to  be  believed,  we  do  not  find  that  any  body  was  sent.''  Reasonableness  of 
Christianity  ;  Works,  vol.  vii.  p.  102. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  ask  whether  this  is  the  language  of  Trinitarians.  See 
move  in  Locke's  letter  to  Limborch  on  the  unity  of  God.    Works,  vol  x.  p.  71. 

*  The  following  extract  from  Locke's  Second  Reply  to  the  Bishop  of  Worces- 
ter, will  give  us  no  very  indistinct  notion  of  his  views  of  the  trinity. 

"  I  presume  your  lordship,  in   your  discourse  in  vindication  of  the  doctrine 


382  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v. 

According  to  bishop  Law,  there  is  much  reason 
for  supposing  Locke  to  have  been  a  contributor  to 
the  Unitarian  Tracts,  puWished  in  England,  near  the 
dose  of  the  seventeenth  century.*  It  is  not  easy, 
perhaps,  to  ascertain  his  precise  opinions  respecting 
the  nature  of  Christ.  Like  tlic  old  Socinians,  and 
the  generality  of  Unitarians  of  the  present  day,  he 
believed  in  the  miraculous  conception  ;  but  it  will  be 
a  difficult  thing  to  prove,  that  he  believed  in  the  sim- 
ple humanity,  or  the  worship  of  Christ,  which  were 
also  two  of  the  leading  tenets  of  Socinianism.  Lard- 
ner  considered  him  an  Arian,  and  ranked  him  with 
Dr.  John  Taylor,  as  may  be  seen  in  his  Letter  on  the 
Logos.t  And,  indeed,  many  of  Locke's  interpreta- 
tions, contained   in  the  Paraphrase  and  JYoCes  on  the 

of  the  trinity,  intends  to  give  it  to  us  as  it  has  been  received  in  the  christian 
church.  And  I  think  your  words,  viz  ;  '  it  is  the  sense  of  the  christian  church, 
which  you  are  bound  to  defend,  and  not  the  particular  opinions  of  your  own,' 
authorise  one  to  think  so.  But  if  I  am  to  own  it,  asyour  lordship  has  there  deli- 
vered it,  I  must  own  that  I  do  not  understand  ;  for  I  confess  your  exposition  of 
the  sense  of  the  church  wholly  transcends  my  capacity. 

<'lf  you  require  me  to  own  it  with  an  implicit  faith,  1  shall  pay  that  defe- 
rence as  soon  to  your  lordship's  exposition  of  the  doctrine  of  the  church,  as 
any  one's.  But  if  I  must  understand  and  know  what  I  own,  it  is  my  misfor- 
tune, and  I  cannot  deny,  that  I  am  far  from  owning  what  you  in  that  discourse 
deliver,  as  I  can  be  far  from  expressing  the  most  unintelligible  thing  that  ever  I 
read,  to  be  the  doctrine  1  own.  Whether  I  make  more  use  of  my  poor  under- 
standing in  the  case,  than  you  are  willing  to  allow  every  one  of  your  readers,  I 
cannot  tell;  but  such  an  understanding  as  God  has  given  me,  is  the  best  I 
have,  and  that  which  I  must  use  in  the  apprehending  what  otiiers  say,  before  I 
can  own  the  truth  of  it  ;  and  for  this  there  is  no  help  that  I  know."  Works, 
»ol.  iv.  p.  198. 

*  Preface  to  Locke's  Works,  p.  vii. 

t  Lardner's  Works,  vol.  xi.  p.  116. 


f.ET.i.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  383 

Epistles^  seem  to  be  founded  on  the  Arian  hypothe- 
sis. This  is  particularly  true  of  the  passage  refer- 
red to  by  Lardner,  where  Locke  speaks  of  the  spi- 
ritual part  of  Christ  being  derived  from  God  "  by  a 
divine  extraction,"  which  plainly  shows,  that  in  his 
highest  nature,  he  considered  him  a  derived  being, 
and  consequently  subordinate  to  the  Deity.*  But  this 
discussion  is  of  little  importance  in  the  present  con- 
nexion. It  is  enough,  that  Locke  has  always  been 
accounted  a  Unitarian,  that  his  writings  confirm  this 
sentiment,  and  that  no  adequate  evidence  has  been 
offered  to  the  contrary. 

We  come  next  to  the  opinions  of  Watts,  Avhom 
you  seem  peculiarly  solicitous  to  rescue  from  the 
hands  of  Unitarians.  As  the  reasons  you  present  for 
believing  him  to  have  "  lived  and  died  a  Tnnitarian," 
are  for  the  most  part  irrelevant  to  the  purpose,  it 
will  be  needless  to  examine  them  in  detail.  They 
may  all  be  summed  up  in  this  one  position;  that,  as 
he  was  once  a  Trinitarian,  he  must  always  have  been 
such.  You  have  proved,  beyond  contradiction,  what 
no  one  has  ever  denied,  or  doubted ;  namely,  that 
Watts  at  one  period  of  his  life  was  zealous  in  the 
trinitarian  faith,  and  wrote  much  in  its  favour.  On 
this  point  there  is  no  disagreement.  But  here  you 
stop  short.     The  only  important  thing  in  the  argu- 

*  See  Locke's  paraphrase  and  note  on  Romans  i,  4.  The  note  is  as  follows. 
"  '  According  to  the  spirit  of  holiness,'  is  here  manifestly  opposed  to, '  accord- 
ing to  the  flesh,' in  the  foregoing  verse,  and  so  must  mean  that  more  pure  and 
spiritual  part  in  him,  which,  bi/  divine  extraction,  he  had  immediately  from 
fJod.'' 


384  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v. 

ment  is  left  untouched.  It  is  believed,  that  Watts 
changed  his  opinions  during  his  lifetime,  and  at  length 
\vent  over  to  the  unitarian  faith.  The  reasons  for 
this  belief  you  have  not  disproved,  nor  even  ap- 
proached. All  you  have  said,  therefore,  may  be 
taken  for  granted,  except  your  inferences  ;  and  with 
this  concession,  I  will  proceed,  in  few  Avords,  to 
state  some  of  the  facts,  which  confirm  the  Unitari- 
anism  of  Dr.  Watts.* 


*  It  was  not  contrary  to  the  Christianity  of  Watts,  to  search  for  the  truth, 
and  change  his  opinions  when  he  found  them  erroneous.  He  did  not  entangle 
liimself  with  creeds  of  men's  invention,  nor  promise  to  conform  to  a  system  of 
faith,  as  the  only  true  explication  of  scripture.  This,  he  knew,  would  be  stop- 
ping at  once  the  channel  of  inquiry,  and  giving  perpetual  currency  to  all  the 
errors,  which  the  folly,  ignorance,  and  selfishness  of  men,  have  entailed  upon 
the  world. 

"  I  thank  God,"  said  he,  "  that  I  have  learned  to  retract  my  former  senti- 
ments, and  change  them,  when  upon  stricter  search  and  review  they  appear 
less  agreeable  to  the  divine  standard  of  faith. 

"It  doth  not  belong  to  such  poor,  imperfect  beings,  as  we  are,  to  remain  for 
ever  immoveable  in  all  the  same  opinions,  that  we  have  once  indulged,  nor  to 
stamp  every  sentiment  with  immortality.  For  a  man  to  be  obstinately  tena- 
cious of  an  old  mistake,  and  incorrigibly  fond  of  an  obscure  phrase  or  concep- 
tion, because  he  has  once  admitted  it,  is  the  shame,  and  not  the  glory,  of  hu- 
man nature." — Preface  to  Dissertations  relating  to  the  Christian  Doctrine  of 
the  Trinity.     Part  II.     Works,  Vol.  VI.  p.  420. 

"  How  vain  a  presumption  it  is,  with  a  pretence  of  divine  authority,  to  im- 
pose mere  human  explications  upon^  the  consciences  of  men,  and  to  forbid 
them  all  the  sacred  blessings  of  especial  communion  in  the  Gospel,  unless  they 
testify  their  assent  to  such  a  particular  hypothesis,  or  scheme  of  explication, 
which  the  imposers  confess  to  be  human,  and  yet  impose  it  in  their  own  pre- 
scribed form  of  words. 

"The  persons,  who  are  guilty  of  this  uncharitable  practice,  may  consecrate 
their  impositions,  and  their  excommunications,  with  holy  names,  and  call 
them  pure  zeal  for  the  divinity  of  Christ  ;  but  I  suspect  it  will  be  found  in  the 
?;reat  day,  to  deserve  no  better  a  character  than  a  mistaken  zeal  for  the  honour 
of  Christ,  mingled,  perhaps,  with  zeal  for  the  divinity  of  their  own  notions." 
— Essay  on  the  true  Importance  of  any  human  Schemes  to  explain  the  sacred 
nnrtrine.  of  the   Trinity.     Sec.  III.     Works,  Vol.  VL  p.  594. 


r,ET.  I.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  385 

A  letter  is  extant,  which  was  written  by  the  Rev. 
Samuel  Merivale  to  Dr.  Priestley,  in  which  the  sen- 
timents of  Dr.  Lardner  on  the  subject  of  Watts's  opi- 
nions are  expressed  in  the  most  unequivocal  terms. 
In  conversation  with  Mr.  Merivale,  as  stated  in  the 
letter,  this  great  man  observed  ;  "  I  think  Dr.  Watts 
never  was  an  Arian,  to  his  honour  be  it  spoken. 
When  he  first  wrote  of  the  trinity,  I  reckon  he  be- 
lieved three  equal  divine  persons.  But  in  the  latter 
part  of  his  life,  for  several  years  before  his  deatli, 
and  before  he  was  seized  with  an  imbecility  of  his 
faculties,  he  was  a  Unitarian.  How  he  came  to  be 
so,  I  cannot  certainly  say  ;  but  I  think  it  was  the  re- 
sult of  his  own  meditations  on  the  Scriptures.  He 
Avas  very  desirous  to  promote  that  opinion,  and  w  rote 
a  great  deal  upon  the  subject." 

After  this  conversation,  Mr.  Merivale,  wishing  to 
obtain  further  information  respecting  Watts's  unpub- 
lished papers,  wrote  a  letter  of  inquiry  to  Dr.  Lard- 
ner, from  whom  he  received  the  following  reply  ; 

"  I  question  whether  you  have  anywhere  in  print 
Dr.  Watts's  last  thoughts  upon  the  trinity.  They 
were  known  to  very  few.  My  nephew,  Neal,  an  un- 
derstanding gentleman,  was  intimate  Avith  Dr.  Watts, 
and  often  with  the  family  where  he  lived.  Some- 
times in  an  evening,  when  they  were  alone,  he  would 
talk  to  his  friends  in  the  family,  of  his  new  thoughts 
concerning  the  person  of  Christ,  and  their  great  im- 
portance ;  and  that,  if  he  should  be  able  to  recom- 
mend them  to  the  world,  it  Avould  be  the  most  consi- 
derable thing  that  ever  he  performed.  My  nephew, 
49 


386  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v. 

tlierefore,  came  to  me,  and  told  me  of  it,  and  that 
the  family  was  greatly  concerned  to  hear  him  talk  so 
much  of  the  importance  of  these  sentiments.  I  told 
my  nephew,  that  Dr.  Watts  was  right  in  saying  they 
were  Important,  but  I  was  of  opinion  that  he  was  un- 
able to  recommend  them  to  the  public,  because  he 
had  never  been  used  to  a  proper  way  of  reasoning 
on  such  a  subject.  So  it  proved.  My  nephew  be- 
ing executor,  had  the  papers,  and  showed  me  some 
of  them.  Dr.  Watts  had  written  a  good  deal,  but 
they  were  not  fit  to  be  published.  Dr.  Waits^s  Last 
Thoughts  were  coivipletely  unitarian."* 

These  facts  are  too  plain  and  conclusive  to  need 
comment.  They  rest  on  the  authority  of  Lardner, 
and  they  could  not  rest  on  a  higher.  He  barely  stat- 
ed Avhat  he  saw  and  knew.  Prove  Lardner  to  have 
been  guilty  of  a  deliberate  falsehood,  or  mistaken  in 
a  case  where  he  had  every  possible  opportunity  of 
knowing  the  truth,  and  you  will  invalidate  his  testi- 
mony. Till  this  be  done,  no  one  can  righfully  refuse 
his  assent  to  the  position  it  establishes ;  w  hich  Is, 
that  the  unpublished  papers  of  Watts  clearly  show- 
ed him  to  have  been  a  Unitarian. 

But  we  need  not  recur  to  unpublished  writings. 
Enough  may  be  found  in  print  to  convince  us,  that 
he  was  not  a  Trinitarian,  whatever  else  he  may  have 
been.  In  his  Solemn  Address  to  the  Deity  he  speaks 
as  follows ; 

"  Dear  and  blessed  God,  hadst  thou  been  pleased, 

*  See  the  whole  of  Mr.  Mexivale's  Letter,  in  Belsham's  Memoirs  of  Liiid- 
sey,  p.  216. 


LET.  I.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  387 

in  any  one  'plain  scripture^  to  have  informed  rae  vvhlcii 
of  the  dilFercnt  opinions  about  the  holy  trinity, 
among  the  contending  parties  of  christians,  had  been 
true,  thou  knowest  with  how  much  zeal,  satisfaction 
and  joy,  my  unbiassed  heart  would  have  opened  it- 
self to  receive  and  embrace  the  divine  discovery. 
Hadst  thou  told  me  plainly,  in  any  sinsrle  text,  that  the 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  are  three  real  distinct 
persons  in  the  divine  nature,  I  had  never  suffered 
myself  to  bcbewildered  in  so  many  doubts,  nor  em- 
barrassed with  so  many  strong  fears  of  assenting  to 
the  mere  inventions  of  men,  instead  of  divine  doctrine  ; 
but  I  should  have  humbly  and  immediately  accepted 
thy  words,  so  far  as  it  was  possible  for  me  to  under- 
stand them,  as  the  only  rule  of  my  faith.  Or  hadst 
thou  been  pleased  to  express  and  include  this  propo- 
sition in  the  several  scattered  parts  of  thy  book, 
from^  whence  ray  reason  and  conscience  might  with 
case  find  out,  and  with  certainty  infer  this  doctrine, 
I  should  have  joyfully  employed  all  my  reasoning 
powers,  with  their  utmost  skill  and  activity,  to  have 
found  out  this  inference,  and  engrafted  it  into  my 
soul. 

"  But  how  can  such  weak  creatures  ever  take  in 
so  stranofe,  so  difficult,  and  so  abstruse  a  doctrine  as 
this,  in  the  explication  and  defence  whereof,  multi- 
tudes of  men,  even  men  of  learning  and  piety,  have 
lost  themselves  in  infinite  subtleties  of  disputes,  and 
endless  mazes  of  darkness.  And  can  this  strange  and 
'perplexing  notion  of  three  real  persons  going  to  make  up 
one  true  God.,  be  so  necessary  and  so  important  a  part  of 


3o8  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v. 

that  christian  doctrine,  which,  in  the  Old  Testament 
and  the  New,  is  represented  as  so  plain  and  so  easy, 
even  to  the  meanest  understandings  ?" 

Three  thino^s  are  obvious  from  these  extracts. 
Firsts  that  Watts  did  not  beheve  the  trinity,  as  usu- 
ally understood,  to  be  "  plainly  taught  in  any  single 
text  ;"  seco?idly,  that  in  his  mind  it  was  not  so  expres- 
sed in  the  Scriptures  at  large,  as  to  be  intelligible  to 
"  reason  and  conscience ;"  and  thirdly,  that  the 
"  strange  and  perplexing  notion  of  three  real  persons 
going  to  make  up  one  true  God,"  is  not  a  "  necessa- 
ry and  important  part  of  the  christian  doctrine," 
whatever  may  be  thought  of  its  reahty.  Is  there  a 
Trinitarian  of  the  present  day,  Avho  will  assent  to 
either  of  these  propositions  ?  It  was  a  favourite 
opinion  at  the  council  of  Nice,  and  for  many  ages 
after,  that  the  trinity  was  not  contained  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, but  taught  by  tradition.  It  has  never  been 
known,  however,  that  Dr.  Watts  had  a  partiality  for 
traditions,  or  that  it  was  common  with  him  to  be- 
lieve in  doctrines,  which  his  "  reason  and  conscience" 
could  not  find  in  the  Scriptures.* 

Hear  what  he  says  in  his  Faithful  Inquiry,  respect- 

*  In  his  treatise  on  The  Importance  of  any  Human  Scheme  to  explain  the 
Trinity,  Watts  says,  "  It  must  be  confessed  with  sorrow  and  shame,  that 
some  writers  have  invented,  or  enlarged  special  explications  of  the  sacred 
doctrine  with  too  great  a  neglect  of  scripture  in  their  studies.  They  have  af- 
fected to  be  wise  in  words  without  ideas.  They  have  set  forth  their  own 
learned  explications  of  th-  doctrine  of  the  trinity,  in  sounding  scholastic 
phrases,  and  hard  words,  with  great  assurance,  and  have  helped  men  to  talk 
roundly  on  this  sublime  subject,  with  a  groat  rxuberance  and  fhirncy  of  such 
language,  as  has  been  established  into  orthodoxy."    Works,  f  ol.  \\.  p.  592. 


LET.  1.11  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  389 

ing  the  word  person^  as  applied  to  the  three  parts  of 
the  trinity. 

"Those  writers,  who  call  the  sacred  three  by  the 
name  of  three  persons,  do  not  assert  or  maintain, 
that  this  very  word  or  expression  of  three  persons, 
is  found  in  Scripture,  nor  is  the  word  ^cr5ow  express- 
ly applied  to  them  all  three. 

"  A  distinct  person,  in  the  full  and  proper  sense  of 
the  word  among  men,  must  be  a  distinct  spirit ;  for 
a  distinct  person  requires  at  least  another  distinct 
consciousness  with  another  distinct  will,  which  seems 
to  infer  another  different  spirit,  ^nd  surely  the  Deity  is 
not  made  up  of  three  such  distinct  and  different  spirits. 

"  Besides,  it  is  sufficiently  evident,  that  in  the  lan- 
guage of  Scripture,  and  in  the  writings  of  the  Jewish 
nation,  those  things,  which  are  not  strictly  and  pro- 
perly persons,  are  often  represented  in  a  personal 
manner,  as  Wisdom,  Law,  Righteousness,  Charity. 
And,  therefore,  the  Sacred  Three  may  be  called 
three  persons,  or  at  least.  Three  Scriptural  Persons,  I 
hope,  without  offence,  and  without  entering  into  the 
tedious,  learned,  and  philosophical  difficulties  about 
the  word  person."* 

What  is  the  import  of  these  passages?  Certain- 
ly not,  that  the  Sacred  Three  are  distinct,  personal 
agents.  They  are  not  three  beings,  who  have  each 
a  "  distinct  consciousness  and  will."  That  is,  they 
are  not  distinct  beings  in  any  sense.  They  are 
"  scriptural  persons  ?"     But  what  is  a  scriptural  per- 


*  Faithful   Inquiry  after  the   ancient   and  original   Doctrine  of  the  Tr 
raught  by  Christ  and  his  Apostles,  p.  19,  20. 


390  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  r 

son?  The  writer  has  told  us,  that  he  understands 
by  this  term,  the  same  as  Wisdom,  Law,  Righteous- 
ness, when  personified  in  the  Scriptures.  According 
to  this  sense,  the  three  persons  of  the  Deity  are 
personifications  of  his  modes  of  action.  There  is  no 
spirit,  or  agent,  distinct  from  the  one  true  God.  His 
unity  is  left  untouched,  and  no  Unitarian  would  dis- 
sent from  the  substance  of  the  views  here  taken. 

In  speaking  further  of  the  nature  of  Christ,  Watts 
says,  "This  second  person,  this  man  Christ  Jesus,  has 
the  true  God  united  to  him,  or  dwelling  in  him,  in  a 
peculiar  manner ;  that  is,  the  man  Jesus  Christ  is  as- 
sumed by  the  great  God,  into  so  near  and  intimate  a 
union  with  himself,  that  they  are  often  represented 
as  one  complex  person,  or  personal  agent'.  The  man 
Jesus  Christ  is  the  inferiour  agent  or  medium  of  the 
great  God,  who  acteth  whatsoever  he  pleases  in  and 
by  the  man  Jesus  Christ."*  These  views,  in  every 
important  respect,  arc  those  of  Unitarians  ;  for  they 
believe,  that  "  the  man  Jesus  Christ  was  the  infe- 
riour agent  or  medium  of  the  great  God,"  that  the 
union  between  them  was  "  so  near  and  intimate," 
that  Christ  spoke,  and  taught,  and  acted  in  exact 
conformity  with  the  divine  will,  and  that  all  he  said 
has  the  same  truth  and  authority,  as  if  God  himself 
had  spoken.  They  believe,  as  well  as  Watts,  that 
Christ  was  inferiour  to  the  Deity,  and  acted  in  all 
things  by  divine  influence,  light,  and  strength. 

Attend,  also,  to  some    remarks  of  Watts   on  the 

*  Faithful  Inquiry,  p.  24. 


LET.  I.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  391 

Holy  Spirit.  After  intimating,  that  "  the  Holy  Spi- 
rit in  the  New  Testament,  when  it  speaks  of  things 
after  the  ascension  of  Christ,  very  generally,  or  for 
the  most  part,  means  that  power  or  influence  of  tlie 
eternal  spirit  of  God,  which  proceedeth  from  the  Fa- 
ther^'' he  goes  on  to  add, 

"  If  the  Holy  Spirit  were  really  a  true  and  proper 
person,  it  would  be  difficult  to  account  for  all  these, 
and  as  many  more  expressions  of  scripture,  which 
cannot  possibly  be  ascribed  to  a  proper  person;  and 
if  in  some  places  these  impersonal  expressions,  or  in 
other  places  the  personal  expressions,  must  be  figu- 
rative, why  may  not  my  explication  of  them  do  as 
well  as  the  contrary  ?  And  thus  the  spirit  of  God 
needs  not  any  where  be  construed  into  a  real,  jyroper, 
distinct  person. 

"  I  know  not  any  place  in  scripture,  which  requires 
us  to  make  express  personal  addresses,  either  of  prayer 
or  of  praise,  wito  the  Spirit. 

"  Surely,  if  praises  or  prayers  were  necessary  to 
be  offered  distinctly  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  'tis  very 
strange,  that  of  all  the  writers  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, not  one  of  them  should  give  us  some  hint  of 
it  in  precept,  instruction,  or  example;  but  neither 
Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  nor  John,  Paul  nor  Peter, 
James  nor  Jude  have  left  us  any  thing  whence  we 
can  infer  it."* 


*  IbiH.  p.  30,  32. 

The  Faithful  Inquiry  was  printed  during  Watts's  lifetime,  but  not  published. 
It  is  said  to  have  been  suppressed  at  the  earnest  solicitation  of  some  of  his 
friends.     Mr.  Burder  intimates,  that  it  was  printed   without  llie  knowledge  of 


392  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  V. 

Now,  If  there  be  any  meaning  in  words,  can  we 
infer  from  this  language,  that  Watts  believed  the 
Holy  Spirit  to  be  a  distinct  being,  equal  in  power 
and  duration  to  God  the  Father  ?  On  the  contrary, 
could  he  express  in  more  decided  terms  his  disbelief 
of  the  personality  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  or  of  the  pro- 
priety of  its  receiving  worship  and  praise  ?  What 
kind  of  faith  in  the  trinity  is  that,  which  rejects  the 
separate  personal  existence,  and  the  worship  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  ?  To  call  a  man  a  Trinitarian,  with 
such  a  faith,  is  contradictory  and  absurd. 

Mr.  Palmer,  who  undertook  to  prove,  that  Dr. 
Watts  was  neither  in  the  Arian  nor  Socinian  belief, 
says  expressly,  that  he  considered  "  Christ  another 
being,  or  person,  in  himself  inferionr  to  the  Father, 
and  derived  from  him^  Watts  in  his  sermons,  as 
quoted  by  Palmer,  also  speaks  of  Christ  as  "  derived 
from  God  the  Father,"  and  calls  him  the  "nearest 
creature  to  the  blessed  God."  As  to  the  Holy  Spirit, 
Palmer  says,  "  He  seems  not  to  have  held  the  com- 
mon notion  of  his  real  personality  as  distinct  from 
the  Father,  supposing  it  to  mean  the  divine  power,  or 
influence,  or  God  himself  as  exerting  this  influence."* 
JNow  whether  these  views  be  Arian  or  Socinian,  1 
will  not  affirm,  but  that  they  are  strictly  Unitarian  1 

the  author,  and  that  "  some  offinious  disciple  of  the  Doctor's  procured  a  copy 
and  printed  it,  either  without  his  consent,  or  subsequent  to  his  death."  This 
jnay  be  true,  but  it  is  mere  conjecture,  and  does  not  affect  the  authenticity  or 
value  of  the  work.  Indeed,  Mr.  Burder  allows,  that  it  contains  very  little  not 
found  in  other  parts  of  Watts's  writings.  Memoirs  of  Watts,  prefixed  to  Bur- 
der sedition  of  his  Works,  p.  37. 

'i  Memoirs  of  Dr.  Watts,  Boston,  1793  ;  Appendix,  p.  91, 129. 


LET.  I.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  393 

can  say  with  confidence.  They  contain  not  even  a 
shadow  of  a  trinity  in  any  approved  acceptation  of 
that  term. 

But  we  have  yet  other  testimony  from  Dr.  Watts's 
own  mouth.  In  a  letter  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Colman  of 
Boston,  written  1747,  he  speaks  as  follows.  "  I  am 
glad  my  book  of  Useful  Questions  came  safe  to  your 
iiand.  I  think  I  have  said  every  thing  concerning 
ihe  Son  of  God,  which  scripture  says  ;  but  1  conld 
not  go  so  Jar  as  to  say,  with  some  of  our  orthodox  di- 
vines, that  the  Son  is  equal  with  the  Father  ;  because 
our  Lord  himself  expressly  says,  '  The  Father  is 
greater  than  I.'  "*  Shall  we  still  persist,  that  Dr. 
Watts  was  a  Trinitarian,  and  that  when  he  said  the 
Father  and  Son  are  not  equal,  he  meant  directly  the 
contrary  ? 

If  a  man,  who  professes  a  belief  In  the  simple 
undivided  unity  of  God ;  who  writes  largely  to  prove 
that  the  Son  is  a  distinct,  derived,  inferiour,  subordi- 
nate, dependent  being;  who  denies  the  personality 
and  separate  existence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  calls 
it  the  power,  or  influence,  or  operating  agency  of 
God,  and  affirms  that  there  is  no  scriptural  evidence 
for  worshipping  this  Spirit;  if  such  a  man  is  to  be 
accounted  a  Trinitarian,  it  will  be  vain  to  trust  any 
longer  to  the  force  of  language,  or  to  look  for  mean- 
ing in  words,  or  distinctions  in  things. 

I  am  not  attempting  to  exhibit  a  general  system  of 

*■  Memoirs  of  Dr,  Watts,  Appendix,  p.  19.     The  original  of  this  letter  I  be- 
lieve is  retained   among  the  files  of  the  Massachusetts  Historical  Society. 

50 


394  SENTIMENTS  AND  iMORALS  [P^RT  v- 

V/atts's  theological  opinion?.  In  some  respects  thej 
were  peculiar,  but  with  these  peculiarities  we  arc 
not  now  concerned.  He  believed  in  the  preexis- 
tence  of  Christ's  human  soul,  and  that  the  Deity 
was  so  intimately  united  with  him,  that  he  might  be 
called  God,  and  be  a  proper  object  of  Avorshlp. 
This  notion  dliTers  in  no  respect  from  the  old  Ariin 
hypothesis,  except  in  giving  a  less  dignified  character 
to  Christ.  The  Arlans  believed  his  divine  nature  to 
have  preexisted,  and  that  ho  was  properly  called  God, 
and  worshipped  as  such,  although  he  was  inferiour 
to  the  Father.  I  aim  not  to  prove,  that  Watts  was 
an  Arlan  or  Soclnian ;  I  know  he  was  neither,  as 
those  names  are  usually  applied  ;  but  I  do  aim  to 
prove  thcit  he  ivas  not  a  Trinitarian  in  any  sense  ivhat- 
ever^  or  that  he  did  not  believe  in  the  existence  of 
three  equal  and  separate  persons,  beings,  agents,  es- 
sences, subsistences,  or  hypostases,  in  the  Deity. 
He  believed  in  one  Supreme  God;  in  one  Lord  Je- 
sus Christ,  who  was  not  equal  to  the  Supreme  God  ; 
and  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  not  as  a  separate  being,  but 
as  the  acting  power  and  influence  of  God.  Hence  I 
call  him  a  Unitarian  ;  and  if  a  person  with  this  mode 
of  faith  be  not  a  Unitarian,  I  know  not  to  what 
name  he  is  entitled.  On  the  testimony  of  Lardner, 
and  especially  on  Watts's  own  writings  as  quoted 
above,  the  argument  may  safely  rest  without  dan- 
ger of  being  destroyed  or  weakened. 

You  refer  to  Watts's  Psalms  and  Hymns  as  testi- 
fying to  his  Trinitarianism.  They  certainly  contain 
suflficient  evidence,  that  he  was  a  Trinitarian  Avhen 
lie  wrote   them,  but  we  know  his  mind  w^as  not  sta- 


i^ET.  r.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  395 

tionary,  for  he  afterwards  "  thanked  God,  that  lie 
had  learned  to  retract  his  former  sentiments,  and 
cliangc  them,  when  upon  stricter  search  and  review, 
thej  appeared  less  agreeable  to  the  divine  standard 
of  faith."  Now  we  have  already  seen,  that  this 
was  the  case  in  regard  to  the  trinity  ;  and  you  are 
doubtless  not  ignorant  of  the  fact,  that  he  was  desi- 
rous long  before  his  death  of  suppressing  or  altering 
parts  of  his  Psalms  and  Hymns,  but  was  prevented 
hy  circumstances  wholly  beyond  his  control. 

Mr.  Tomkins  had  very  freely  pointed  out  to  him 
the  impropriety  of  sanctioning  with  his  name  doxo- 
logies  to  the  trinity,  and  especially  to  the  Holy  Spi- 
rit, since  he  had  declared  his  belief,  that  the  spirit 
was  not  a  separate  being,  and  that  such  ascriptions 
of  praise  were  not  authorized  in  scripture.  In  re- 
ply, Dr.  Watts  writes ;  "  I  freely  answer,  I  wish 
some  things  were  corrected.  But  the  question  with 
me  is  this.  As  I  wrote  them  in  sincerity  at  that 
time,  is  it  not  more  for  the  edification  of  christians, 
and  the  glory  of  God,  to  let  them  standi  than  to  ruin 
the  usefulness  of  the  whole  book,  by  correcting 
them  now,  and  perhaps  bring  further  and  false  sus- 
picions on  my  present  opinions  ?  Besides,  I  might 
tell  you,  that  of  all  the  books  I  have  written,  that 
particular  copy  is  not  mine.  I  sold  it  for  a  trifle  to 
Mr.  Lawrence  near  thirty  years  ago,  and  his  poste- 
rity make  money  of  it  to  this  very  day,  and  I  can 
scarce  claim  a  right  to  make  any  alteration  in  the 
book,   which   would    injure    the  sale    of   it."*     And 

•'  Memoirs  of  Dr.  Watts,  Appendix,  p.  144;  as  nuotcd  from  Palmer. 


396  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v. 

again,  he  replied  to  Mr.  Grove,  who  suggested  al- 
terations, that  "  he  should  be  glad  to  do  it,  but  it  was 
out  of  his  power,  for  he  had  parted  with  the  copy, 
and  the  bookseller  would  not  suffer  any  such  altera- 
tion."* These  testimonies  are  enough  to  show  why 
Watts  should  desist  from  an  attempt  to  make  such 
alterations,  as  his  change  of  sentiments  would  seem 
to  require.  At  least  they  are  such  reasons  as  he 
thought  satisfactory. 

It  is  to  be  remarked,  that  he  does  not  defend  the 
doxologies,  but  simply  gives  reasons,  why  he  cannot 
alter  them.  In  one  part  of  his  reply  to  Mr.  Tom- 
kins  he  does  insinuate,  that  it  is  not  unlawful  to  as- 
cribe praises  to  the  Spirit,  although  it  be  not  strictly 
scriptural.  Inasmuch  as  "  the  spirit  of  any  being  is 
sometimes  used  for  being  itself,  and  the  spirit  of  God 
sometimes  means  God  himself,"  he  supposed  it  law- 
ful to  address  the  Spirit  in  the  character  of  God,  or, 
which  comes  to  the  same  thing,  to  address  the  Fa- 
ther under  the  name  of  Spirit.  But  he  did  not  pre- 
tend, that  this  notion  was  scriptural ;  he  made  no 
other  use  of  it  than  to  diminish,  as  he  thought,  the 
impropriety  of  using  the  doxologies.  To  most  un- 
derstandings, however,  this  contrivance  can  seem  only 
to  Increase  the  confusion  and  embarrassment.  Mr. 
Tomkins  was  not  satisfied  with  it,  nor  with  the  argu- 
ment drawn  from  the  otfence,  which  Dr.  Watts  sup- 
posed might  be  given  to  some  serious  christians,  if  the 
hymns  were  altered  according  to  his  present  senti- 
ments. 

*  Monthly  Repository,  Vol.  VIII,  p.  770,  771. 


I.ET.  i.^  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  SQ"/ 

But  there  is  no  occasion  to  follow  this  discussion. 
It  is  evident  through  the  whole,  that  Watts  was 
searching  for  the  best  reasons  to  quiet  his  mind  in  a 
case  of  necessity.  To  alter  his  hymns  was  out  of  his 
power;  he  regretted  this  misfortune,  but  as  it  was  not 
to  be  remedied,  he  was  willing  to  contemplate  it  in 
its  most  favourable  aspect.  The  main  thing  to  our 
present  purpose  is,  that  he  acknowledged  a  desire  to 
make  alterations,  and  never  in  any  shape  defended 
the  trinitarian  parts  of  the  hymns.  In  fact,  had  he 
believed  in  these  parts  the  discussion  could  not  have 
commenced. 

With  these  short  hints  and  quotations,  I  am  wil- 
ling to  leave  it  to  the  judgment  and  candour  of  every 
impartial  reader  to  decide,  whether  I  committed  a 
very  heinous  offence  in  placing  even  the  "  pious  and 
heavenly  minded  Watts  in  such  company,"  as  that  of 
Newton,  Locke,  Lardner,  Whitby,  Lindsey,  and 
others  of  well  known  piety  and  excellence,  and  of 
similar  theological  sentiments.* 


*  Many  particulars,  respecting  the  opinions  of  Watts,  may  be  seen  in  Bel- 
sham's  Memoir  of  Liiidsey,  p.  216. — Strictures  in  the  Monthly  Repository, 
[Vol.  VIII,  pp.  683,  715,  768,]  on  Mr.  Palmer's  publication,  entitled.  Dr. 
Watts  no  Socinian. — Christian  Disciple,  Vol.  II.  New  Series,  p.  461  ;  and 
Vol.  III.  p.  \^Q.— Yates's  Sequel,  p.  93.— Burder's  Memoirs,  p.  30,  et  seqq.— 
The  whole  of  the  Solemri  Address  to  the  Deity,  as  contained  in  the  Christian 
Reformer,  Vol.  I,  p.  113. 


»9B  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part 


LETTER  II. 

Morals    of   celebrated    Unitarians    helonfsinw    to    the 
English  Church. 


In  my  first  letter  1  incidentally  mentioned  the 
names  of  several  j3crsons,  whose  lives  and  characters, 
it  was  though^;,  aiforded  no  feeble  testimony  to  the 
mcorrectness  of  your  charges  of  immorality  and  ir- 
religion  against  Unitarians.  I  was  so  unfortunate, 
however,  as  to  select  a  few  names  to  which  you  have 
taken  great  exceptions.  Among  these  you  specify 
Clayton,  Hoadly,  Chillingworth,  Ld,w,  Blackburne  ; 
and  your  principle  of  selection  would  embrace  Dr. 
Samuel  Clarke,  and  all  others,  who  were  Unitarians, 
and  at  the  same  time  belonged  to  the  English  Church. 
You  are  amazed,  that  any  one  should  refer  to  such 
men  as  examples  of  morality.  "  I  am  astonished," 
you  say,  "  and  know  not  how  men,  whom  I  am  com- 
pelled to  consider  as  honest  and  sincere  themselves, 
can  so  far  suffer  their  zeal  to  triumph  over  their 
prudence,  I  had  almost  said  over  their  moral  sense, 
as  to  claim  such  associates."  It  is  presumed,  that  all 
your  readers,  who  know  any  thing  of  the  characters 
of  these  persons,  have  been  equally  astonished,  that 
your  own  '•  zeal  should  so  far  triumph  over  your  pru- 


LET.  n.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  399 

dence,"  as  to  suffer  you  to  arraign  before  your  indi- 
vidual judgment,  and  condemn,  Avith  a  latitude  of 
censure  amounting  almost  to  reprobation,  men,  \v!io 
have  been  universally  admired  for  their  talents,  and 
revered  for  their  virtues. 

Since  you  have  thus  ventured,  in  terms  the  most 
serious,  to  impeach  the  characters  of  persons,  who 
have  always  been  considered  not  less  an  ornament  to 
the  christian  profession,  than  worthy  examples  of 
the  good  inllucnces  of  the  unitarian  faith,  it  becomes 
my  duty  to  examine  the  fact  in  regard  to  their  mo- 
rals and  lives,  and  also  to  inquire  into  the  grounds  of 
your  impeachment.  If,  indeed,  it  can  be  made  out, 
that  these  were  bad  men,  and  used  religion  onlv  as  a 
cloak  for  worldly  and  wicked  purposes,  as  you  would 
seem  to  insinuate,  then  it  must  be  confessed,  that  the 
argument  in  favour  of  the  moral  tendency  of  Unita- 
rianism  is  rather  weakened  than  confirmed  by  ap- 
pealing to  their  example.  But  if  the  contrary  be 
true,  and  tbey  be  ascertained  to  have  been  exempla- 
ry and  pious  christians,  it  will  follow,  that  you  were 
mistaken,  more  vehement  than  accurate,  and  that 
the  argument  is  sound. 

As  the  only  mode  of  settling  the  question  in  this 
shape,  is  by  an  appeal  to  their  wa-itings  and  contem- 
poraries, it  can  hardly  be  supposed,  that  my  limited 
plan  will  allow  me  to  go  into  a  full  investigation.  I 
can  only  touch  on  a  few  prominent  particulars.  They 
shall  be  such,  however,  as  will  be  conclusive.  The 
truth  is,  you  cannot  select  an  equal  number  of  men 
rtf  so   much   eminence  from   any  period    of  history. 


400  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v. 

who  were  more  distinguished  for  their  excellence 
and  christian  virtues.  Had  you  thrown  your  shafts 
at  random,  they  could  not  have  been  more  unfortu- 
nate In  the  direction  they  took,  or  the  objects  on 
which  they  chanced  to  fall.  It  is  a  fact,  which  you 
have  not  attempted  to  controvert,  and  which  I  am 
persuaded  you  will  not,  that  these  men  were  remark- 
able for  their  practical  goodness.  Why  then  arc 
they  loaded  with  charges  so  heavy  and  offensive, 
why  so  much  abhorrence  expressed  of  their  very 
names,  why  are  they  libelled  and  proscribed  as  men, 
who  were  a  disgrace  to  their  profession,  who  are  to 
be  reprobated  and  condemned  as  malefactors,  and 
whom  no  honest  man  in  defence  of  a  good  cause  can 
"claim  as  associates?"  You  answer,  that  In  belong- 
ing to  the  Church  of  England,  they  subscribed  to 
articles  which  they  did  not  believe.  It  follows,  that 
they  were  hypocrites,  and  their  goodness  a  show  for 
their  own  convenience  and  interest.  As  the  burden 
of  your  charges  rests  on  this  point,  it  shall  be  exa- 
mined with  some  attention. 

The  question  is,  whether  these  men  did  not  obey 
the  dictates  of  conscience,  and  conform  to  the  deci- 
sion of  their  judgment,  in  the  course  they  pursued? 
If  so,  it  would  have  been  criminal  to  act  differently. 
They  arc  not  to  be  judged  by  a  rule,  which  any  in- 
dividual, not  acquainted  with  their  motives,  may  Ima- 
gine he  should  prescribe  to  himself  under  similar 
circumstances.  By  this  mode  of  judging,  you  would 
admit  no  man  to  be  conscientious,  or  sincere,  or  to 
act   rightly,  till   he  should   be  guided   by  your  rule. 


AET.  II.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  401 

You  have  denounced  these  men  as  hypocrites,  im- 
moral, and  irrehgious,  on  principles  by  wliich  every 
man  in  the  community  might,  in  a  greater  or  less  de- 
gree, come  under  the  same  censure.  When  you  can 
prove  by  a  man's  conduct,  that  he  aims  to  promote 
selfish  interests  and  unholy  purposes  by  a  sacrifice  of 
every  thing,  which  can  dignify  and  adorn  the  human 
character,  or  that  he  disregards  all  the  laws  of  right 
reason  and  of  revelation,  which  concern  him  as  an 
immortal  and  accountable  being,  you  may  then,  and 
not  before,  discover  some  show  of  justice  in  such  a 
sentence  of  condemnation,  as  you  have  passed  upon 
these  men.  In  the  present  case,  no  such  proof  can 
be  exhibited.  No  motives  can  be  urged,  which 
could  have  induced  them  to  dissemble.  The  whole 
tenour  of  their  lives  is  a  standing  witness  to  their 
uprightness,  and  whatever  may  be  thought  of  their 
views  of  subscription,  it  is  contrary  to  every  princi- 
ple of  justice  and  charity,  of  conviction  and  belief, 
to  suppose  that  in  a  case  of  the  greatest  possible 
moment,  they  forsook  the  integrity,  which  had  uni- 
formly guided  them  in  concerns  of  infinitely  less  im- 
portance. 

It  is  well  known,  that  very  different  opinions  have 
been  entertained  by  different  persons,  respecting  the 
nature  and  terms  of  subscription.  Some  have  con- 
tended, that  the  articles  ought  to  be  exjJicitly  be- 
lieved in  their  literal  sense  by  the  person  subscrib- 
ing, while  others  have  considered  them  as  designed 
to  secure  the  peace  and  union  of  the  Church,  with- 
out intendinoj  to  impose  a  belief,  or  a  pretended  he/- 
^51 


402  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [party. 

lief,  in  particular  dogmas.  At  present  it  will  be  suffi- 
cient to  hint  at  three  general  modes,  in  which  the 
subject  lias  been  vicAved. 

First,  h  was  a  very  early  opinion,  that  the  arti- 
cles were  intended  not  so  much  to  be  articles  oi faith, 
as  of  peace.  Such  was  the  opinion  of  Laud,  of 
Sheldon,  and  many  others  of  that  period.  Some 
general  forms  were  necessary  to  keep  the  Church 
together,  and  although  the  framers  of  the  articles 
made  them  express  their  own  belief,  yet  the  object 
to  be  attained  Avas  a  unity  of  action,  an  agreement 
of  order,  a  resolution  and  promise  to  submit  to  the 
authority,  and  support  the  institutions  of  the  Church. 

This  Avas  the  sense  in  Avhich  the  subject  Avas  un- 
derstood by  Chillingworth.  He  publicly  professed 
not  to  subscribe  the  articles,  as  articles  of  faith,  but 
of  peace.  To  this  eftect  he  speaks  in  the  folloAving 
Avords ;  "  For  the  Church  of  England  I  am  fully  per- 
suaded, that  the  constant  doctrine  of  it  is  so  pure 
and  orthodox,  that  Avhosoever  believes  it,  and  lives  ac- 
cording to  it,  shall  be  saved;  and  that  there  is  no 
error  in  it,  which  may  necessitate  or  warrant  any  man 
to  disturb  the  peace,  or  renounce  the  communion  of 
it ;  this,  in  my  opinion,  is  all  intended  by  snbscrip- 
tiony*  Here  is  no  concealment,  duplicity,  nor  dis- 
sembling. He  tells  you  plainly  and  frankly,  Avhat  he 
understands  by  subscribing ;  and  whatever  may  have 
been  his  opinions  in  other  respects,  there  is  no  room 
for  doubting  his  honesty  and  integrity  in  this  act. 
He  was  first  opposed  to  subscription  from  scruples 

^  Prefacf;  to  the  Author  of  Charity  Maintained,  Sec.  40. 


LET.  11.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  4015 

of  conscience,  when  a  very  advantageous  preferment 
in  the  Church  was  offered  to  him  ;  and  the  letter, 
which  he  wrote  to  Dr.  Sheldon,  declining  this  oirer, 
because  he  could  not  assent  to  the  articles  in  the 
sense,  which  he  believed  them  to  convey,  affords  one 
of  the  noblest  testimonies  of  a  powerful  intellect,  an 
excellent  heart,  an  independent  spirit,  a  lofty  inte- 
grity, and  great  sacrifices  for  the  sake  of  conscience, 
which  have  ever  appeared.  Speaking  of  subscrip- 
tion, he  observes  in  his  letter,  "  I  thank  God  I  am 
now  so  resolved,  that  I  shall  never  do  that  while  I  am 
living  and  in  health,  which  I  would  not  do  if  I  v/erc 
dying  ;  and  this  I  am  sure  I  would  not  do."*  At  this 
time  he  conceived,  that  the  articles  should  not  be 
subscribed,  unless  they  were  believed  in  their  most 
obvious  sense.  A  long  correspondence  ensued,  in 
which  Sheldon,  who  was  afterwards  archbishop,  ar- 
gued, that  the  articles  were  meant  to  be  "  forms  of 
peace."  The  reasoning  of  Sheldon,  strengthened 
by  that  of  archbishop  Laud,  who  was  the  patron  of 
Chillingworth,  produced  a  change  in  his  opinions. 
Without  pretending  to  discuss  the  grounds  of  this 
change,  I  would  simply  inquire,  with  what  semblance 
of  justice,  or  candour,  can  any  one  accuse  him  of 
treachery  to  his  conscience  in  this  decision,  any  more 
than  in  the  first,  when  the  inducement  was  just  as 
strong  7  In  referring  to  this  subject,  the  editors  of 
the  Biographia  Britannica  observe,  "  Whether  Chil- 
lingworth's  opinion  upon   this  head    were  right,  or 


*  This  leltei-  maybe  seen  at  full  length  in  Kippis'  edition  of  the  Biog.  BriL 
Arl.  Chiliingworlh  ;  and  alsp  in  the  Monthly  Repository,  vol,  ix.  p.  3. 


404  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v 

wrong,  there  can  be  no  doubt,  from  the  whole  tc- 
nour  of  his  Hfe,  that  he  acted  with  perfect  integ- 
rity."* 

You  say  of  him,  tliat  "  he  was  a  Protestant  and 
Papist  by  turns,  and  at  length  died  a  Socinian,  soon 
after  having  solemnly  denied  that  he  was  one."  This 
is  harsh  in  the  extreme,  and  the  more  so,  as  it  is  in- 
capable of  being  supported  by  a  shadow  of  proof. 
The  mind  of  Chillingworth  was  uncommonly  inqui- 
sitive from  his  childhood,  and  his  love  of  truth 
was  equal  to  his  desire  of  attaining  knowledge.  By 
his  early  intimacy  with  a  learned  Jesuit,  he  was  in- 
duced to  embrace  the  Catholic  faith  ;  but  his  mind 
was  hardly  matured,  before  he  discovered  his  error, 
and  became,  during  the  remainder  of  his  life,  the 
most  able,  learned,  and  successful  defender  of  Pro- 
testantism, that  has  ever  engaged  in  the  cause.  This, 
in  your  language,  was  being  a  Papist  and  Protestant 
by  turns.  It  is  not  true,  that  he  was  ever  a  Soci- 
nian. It  was  a  slander  reiterated  by  his  enemies  dur- 
ing his  lifetime,  but,  like  other  slanders,  was  never 
substantiated.  Had  you  ever  read  Chillingworth's 
admirable  apology  for  his  change  of  opinions,  I  must 
believe  you  would  never  have  injured  his  memory 
by  such  ill  founded  and  ungenerous  insinuations  as 
those  above.  No  one  can  contemplate  his  remarks 
without  admiring  his  frankness,  his  charitable  tem- 
per, his  humility,  his  zeal  for  truth;  nor  without 
feeling  the  utmost  confidence  in  the  purity  of  his  in- 

*  Biog.  Brit.  vol.  iii.  p.  518. 


l,ET.n.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  405 

tentions,  the  sincerity  of  his  heart,  and  the  piety  of 
his  soul.* 

The  views  of  Clayton  seem  to  have  been  nearly 
the  same  as  those  of  Chillingworth.  He  was,  if  pos- 
sible, more  open  in  the  avowal  of  his  opinion,  as  ap- 
pears from  his  eloquent  speech  before  the  Irish 
House  of  Lords,  in  which  he  defended  a  bill  pro- 
posing alterations  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 
He  argued  and  proved,  that  it  was  not  the  intention 
of  the  original  act  of  uniformity,  by  which  subscrip- 
tion was  required,  to  enforce  a  belief  \n  particular  doc- 
trines, but  simply  to  demand  an  "unfeigned  assent 
and  consent  to  the  use  of  all  things  in  the  said  book." 
Such  was  the  language  of  the  Act,  but  in  the  form 
of  declaration  then  in  use,  the  words  here  marked 
with  italics,  were  omitted,  thereby  conveying  a  total- 
ly different  sense,  and  perverting  the  original  inten- 
tion of  the  Act.  "  As  there  is,"  says  Clayton  in  this 
speech,  "  a  wide  distance  between  being  certain  of 
the  truth,  and  being  certain  of  the  falsehood  of 
some  propositions,  it  is  no  way  inconsistent  with  the 
strictest  honesty  for  persons  to  give  their  assent  and 
consent,  for  peace  and  uniformity's  sake,  to  the  use  of 

*  See  Chillingwoith's  Religion  of  Protestants  a  safe  Way  to  Salvation. 
Chap.  V.  ^  103.— chap.  iv.  <)  16.— chap.  vi.  ^  56. 

Clarendon  says  of  him,  that  "  he  was  a  man  of  excellent  parts,  and  cheer- 
ful disposition;  void  of  all  kind  of  vice,  and  endued  with  many  notable  vir- 
tues ;  of  a  very  public  heart,  and  an  indefatigable  desire  to  do  good." 

Some  excellent  remarks  on  the  character  and  principles  of  Chillingworth, 
and  the  persecutions  he  received  from  his  enemies,  as  well  as  strictures  on  the 
ravings  of  Cheynel  respecting  his  last  illness,  death,  and  burial,  may  be  seen 
in  Hoadly's  Letter  to  Dr.  Snapc,  prejixcd  to  Pillonniere's  Answer.  Works, 
vol.  ii.  p.  617,  et  scqq. 


40(i  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v. 

some  particular  forms  of  Avorship,  either  in  doctrine 
or  discipline,  though  they  may  not  thoroughly  ap- 
prove of  the  things  themselves,  and  to  try  to  get 
them  amended  ;  while  the  public  declaration  of  our 
assent  and  consent  to  the  things  themselves,  ties 
down  the  mind  from  any  further  inquiry,  and  by  dis- 
couraging all  doubts  and  inquisitive  industry,  puts  a 
stop  to  all  improvement  in  knowledge,  or  any  further 
reformation  in  religion."  The  same  opinion  he  de- 
fended several  years  before,  in  a  dedication  to  Dr. 
Stone,  Primate  of  Ireland,  which  was  prefixed  to  an 
Essay  on  Spirit. 

Add  to  this,  that  Clayton  was  renowned  through 
his  whole  life  for  his  numerous  virtues,  for  his  amia- 
ble disposition,  benevolence,  disinterestedness,  and 
indeed  for  all  the  characteristics  of  a  pious  and  good 
man ;  that  he  was  persecuted  for  his  opinions,  and 
suffered  much  from  the  reproaches  and  the  ill  treat- 
ment of  the  world, — add  these  things,  and  then  ask 
yourself,  what  possible  reason  can  be  devised  for 
supposing  him  to  have  been  actuated  by  any  other 
than  conscientious,  honest,  and  pure  motives  ?  He 
did  not  need,  nor  covet,  the  emoluments  of  the 
Church,  for  he  possessed  an  ample  fortune,  and  was 
known  frequently  to  bestow  more  in  offices  of  cha- 
rity, than  the  whole  amount  of  his  ecclesiastical  sti- 
pends. Instead  of  a  lavish  bounty  of  censure,  there- 
fore, a  true  christian  spirit  Avould  find  much  to  com- 
mend and  admire  in  the  virtues  of  such  a  man  * 


*  The   following   anecdote    is    illustrative    of    the   character   of   Clayton. 
While  on  a  visit  to  London,  a  person  of  respectable  appearance  called  on  him 


LET.  U.J  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  407 

Secondly,  the  articles  have  been  considered  as  re- 
quiring subscription  in  tliat  sense,  which  the  subscri- 
ber believes  to  be  consistent  with  scripture.  This 
opinion  was  adopted  and  defended  by  Dr.  Samuel 
Clarke.  It  is  in  conformity  with  the  protcstant 
principle  of  taking  the  Scriptures  as  our  only  guide. 
No  one  can  adhere  to  this  principle  in  assenting  to 
forms  of  human  composition,  unless  he  receives  them 
in  that  sense  only,  which  he  believes  the  Scriptures 
to  convey,  and  as  affording  such  interpretations  of  the 
Scriptures,  as  are  consistent  with  the  meaning  he  at- 
taches to  tliem.  Hence,  Avhatever  form  of  words 
any  one  may  be  called  to  subscribe,  for  religious  pur- 
poses, he  is  bound  to  receive  them  in  that  sense,  in 
which  they  can  be  made  consistent  expositions  of 
scripture,  and  in  no  other.  Dr.  Clarke  declares  this 
to  have  been  the  principle  by  Avhich  he  was  guided, 
in  respect  to  the  trinity.  "  I  desire  it  may  be  ob- 
served," he  says,  "  that  my  assent  to  the  use  of  the 
forms  by  law  appointed,  and  to  all  words  of  human 


to  ask  charity.  Suspecting  imposition,  he  at  first  declined,  hut  when  the 
name  of  Dr.  Clrake  was  incidentally  mcnlioned  by  the  person,  Clayton  told 
him,  if  he  would  obtain  a  certificate  from  Dr.  Clarke,  respecting  the  necessity 
of  his  circumstances,  he  would  afford  him  aid.  A  certificate  was  produced, 
and  without  further  inquiry,  he  gave  him  three  hundred  pounds,  which  sum 
was  abundantly  sufficient  to  relieve  him  from  all  his  embarrassments. 

Hearing  of  this  noble  act  of  benevolence,  Dr.  Clarke  sought  the  acquain- 
tance of  Clayton,  and  introduced  him  to  the  Queen,  who  was  so  much  de- 
lighted with  the  simplicity  of  his  manners,  the  gentleness  of  his  disposition, 
his  benevolent  and  charitable  spirit,  that  she  immediately  provided  for  his  be- 
ing appointed  to  the  first  vacant  bishopric  in  Ireland.  It  hence  appears,  that 
the  sole  cause  of  his  preferment  was  t\^e  excellence  of  his  character,  for  it  was 
long  after  this  period,  that  ho  attained  the  celebrity  to  which  he  was  raisen 
by  his  learning  and  talents.     Biog.  Brit.  vol.  Hi.  p.  621. 


408  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v. 

institution,  is  given  only  in  that  sense,  wherein  they 
are,  according  to  the  exphcation  given  in  the  several 
parts  of  this  book,  [Scripture  Doctrine  of  the  Tri- 
nity,] agreeable  to  that  which  appears  to  me,  upon 
the  most  careful  and  serious  consideration  of  the 
whole  matter,  to  be  the  doctrine  of  scripture  ;  and 
not  in  that  sense,  which  the  popish  schoolmen,  affect- 
ing, for  the  sake  of  transubstantiation,  to  make  every 
thing  look  like  a  contradiction,  endeavoured  to  intro- 
duce into  the  church."*  Will  you  say,  that  Dr. 
Clarke  was  not  sincere  in  this  declaration,  that  he 
was  seeking  for  a  subterfuge,  that  he  cherished  self 
delusion,  and  aimed  to  deceive  the  world,  that  he 
rashly  and  foolishly  hazarded  the  safety  of  his  soul, 
by  defying  the  vengeance  of  a  holy  and  heart  search- 
ing God  ?  You  must  either  sustain  these  positions, 
or  allow  his  purposes  to  have  be6n  good,  and  his 
conduct  innocent.t 

It  is  the  same  with  him,  as  in  the  examples  of 
Chillingworth  and  Clayton.  You  have  no  other  cri- 
terion of  judging,  than  the  character  which  he  sus- 
tained through  life  ;  and  it  may  be  doubted  if  histo- 
ry have  recorded  one  more  worthy  or  unexception- 
able. The  strength  of  his  religious  affections,  and 
the  high  and  uniform  tone  of  his  morals,  which  his 
writings  display,  and  Avhich  no  one  has  attempted  to 

*  Introduction  to  the  Scripture  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  p.  33. 

t  Bishop  Pearson  seems  to  have  had  the  same  opinion  as  Dr.  Clarke. 
Speaking  of  the  Cieed,  he  says,  "  I  observe  that  whatsoever  is  delivered  in  the 
Creed,  we  therefore  believe,  Aecause  it  is  contained  in  the  Scriptures;  and 
consequently  must  so  believe  it  as  it  is  contained  there."  Exposition  of  the 
Creed,  4th  edit.  p.  227. 


tET.  II.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  409 

disparage,  are  well  expressed  in  the  following  lan- 
guage of  his  biographer.  "  His  piety  was  manly  and 
unaffected,  built  upon  the  most  solid  grounds,  and 
free  from  all  pomp  and  show.  The  charity  of  his 
temper  and  good  will  was  as  extensive  as  the  whole 
rational  creation  of  God.  The  love  of  the  religious 
and  civil  liberties  of  mankind  was  a  ruling  and  j)ow- 
erful  principle  in  his  heart  and  practice.  In  a  word, 
his  morals,  from  the  first  of  his  days  to  the  last, 
were  without  reproach.  There  was  an  innocence 
and  inoffensivcness  remarkable  through  his  whole  be- 
haviour, and  his  life,  when  he  came  into  the  view  of 
the  great  world,  was  an  ornament  and  strength  to 
that  religion,  which  his  pen  so  well  defended."* 

A  third  mode  of  considering  the  articles  is,  that 
they  ought  to  be  received  according  to  the  intention 
of  the  legislature,  by  which  they  were  originally 
imposed.  This  view  is  supported  by  Paley.f  He 
reasons,  that  it  was  not  the  original  intention  to  make 
every  man  believe  in  each  separate  proposition,  as 
such  a  thing  is  plainly  impossible.  The  articles  in- 
volve the  most  intricate  subjects  of  metaphysical 
controversy,  in  which  no  two  men  were  ever  in  all 
respects  agreed.  It  was  intended  to  exclude  persons 
inclined  to  popery,  anabaptists,  puritans,  and  all  oth- 

*  Hoadly's  Life  of  Clarke,  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  468. 

Foi-  a  high  eulogy  on  the  virtues  and  piety  of  Dr.  Clarke,  see  Bishop  Hare's 
Works,  vol.  ii.  p.  23.  Lond.  1746.  It  was  a  saying  of  the  parishioners  of  Dr. 
Clarke, — "However  we  differ  from  him  in  some  matters,  we  desire  to  see  no 
other  person  in  the  pulpit." 

+  Moral  Philosophy,  book  Iii.  part  1,  chap.  22. 

52 


410  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v. 

CIS  opposed  to  the  episcopal  establishment.  Any 
person  embraced  within  this  list,  Dr.  Paley  thinks 
ought  not  to  subscribe  at  all;  but  any  one  not  thus 
embraced  may  subscribe  without  giving  credence  to 
every  article,  provided  he  is  convinced,  that  he  com- 
plies strictly  with  the  intention  of  the  legislature. 

Now  I  am  very  far  from  defending  these  modes 
of  regarding  the  articles;  nor  does  it  come  within 
my  province  to  enter  upon  their  merits.  It  is  enough 
to  bring  into  view  the  facts  stated  above  to  show, 
that  the  persons,  whom  you  have  censured  with  so 
much  freedom,  had  reasons  for  their  conduct,  and 
such  reasons  as  have  been  approved  and  acted  upon 
by  wise  and  good  men  of  all  parties.  I  do  not  as- 
sert the  truth  of  their  opinions,  nor  plead  for  their 
infallibility,  but  for  their  integrity,  their  conviction, 
and  righteous  motives.  I  infer  these  from  the  unim- 
peachable character  of  their  lives,  from  their  multi- 
plied deeds  of  piety  and  goodness,  and  from  their 
own  declarations  respecting  their  views  of  the  na- 
ture and  object  of  subscription.  In  screening  them 
from  your  charges,  I  impose  no  tax  on  the  indulgence 
of  any  person  ;  I  demand  the  exercise  of  common 
justice. 

It  is  not  important  to  investigate  the  particular 
motives  of  all  the  persons,  whom  your  rule  would 
include.  Their  precise  opinions  respecting  subscrip- 
tion may  not  always  be  so  accurately  known,  as  in 
the  examples  above  cited.  But  the  argument  holds 
good  in  all  cases,  that  they  ought  to  be  considered 
honest  in  this   particular,  when  they  were  known  to 


LET.  11.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  411 

be  so  in  every  tiling  else  ;  and  that  whatever  they 
thought  of  the  mode,  they  were  conscientious  in  the 
thing  itself.  If  you  deny  this,  you  must  deny,  that 
character  has  any  dependence  on  actions,  and  affirm, 
that  men  are  to  be  accounted  moral  or  immoral,  ac- 
cording to  the  fancy  or  caprice  of  any  one,  who  may 
choose  to  sit  in  judgment. 

In  regard  to  Hoadly,  whoever  doubts  his  integrity 
in  any  course  he  pursued,  I  would  advise  him  to  read 
his  sermons  on  Christian  Moderation,  on  Judging  one 
another,  and  on  Persecution.  In  these  sermons  may 
be  seen  the  high  principles  of  rectitude,  of  moral 
dignity,  and  of  religious  freedom,  which  influenced 
his  opinions,  and  regulated  his  practice.  In  these 
may  also  be  seen  the  deep  responsibility  under  which 
he  felt  to  his  Maker,  and  the  love  and  good  will, 
which  he  cherished  for  all  men.  If  a  man's  writ- 
ings from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  a  long  life,  are 
to  be  taken  as  any  test  of  his  principles  and  charac- 
ter, no  one  can  be  entitled  to  a  fairer  fame  than 
Hoadly.  He  Avas  an  advocate,  and  a  powerful 
advocate,  for  civil  and  religious  liberty.  His  sermon 
before  the  king,  on  the  Kingdom  of  Christ,  which 
was  the  commencement  of  the  famous  Bangorian 
controversy,  was  wholly  occupied  in  defending  the 
great  protestant  principle  of  the  right  of  private 
judgment,  and  perfect  freedom  of  thought  in  reli- 
gion. These  were  themes  of  which  he  was  never 
w^eary.  The  purity  of  his  morals  was  equal  to  his 
singleness  of  heart,  and  love  of  indej)endencc. 
Although    he    w^as    attacked    with    much    violence 


412  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v, 

from  every  quarter,  and  compelled  to  make  many 
replies,  and  meet  many  heavy  charges,  it  was  said  of 
him  at  the  time,  and  it  is  not  likely  to  be  controvert- 
ed at  the  present  day,  that  "the  enemies  of  religi- 
ous liberty  had  not  been  able  to  fix  any  disgrace  on 
the  unspotted  character  of  the  most  excellent  bi- 
shop."* 

The  case  of  Blackburne  is  more  in  point,  than  any 
I  have  noticed.     He  refused  preferment,  because  he 
would  not  again  subscribe.     He    was  intimate  with 
Lindsey,  Disney,  and  others  of  the  unitarian   belief, 
and   when   Dr.   Chandler  died,  the  congregation   at 
the    old    Jewry,   in   London,    knowing  Black burne's 
views  concerning  the  established  Church,  took  pains 
to   ascertain   whether,  if  chosen,  he    would  become 
their   pastor.     He   declined,  notAvithstanding  his  in- 
come would  be  three  times  as  large   as   the    one  he 
then  received.     "  His  continuance   in   the   church," 
says  Dr.  Rees,  "  cannot  be  justly  ascribed  to  any  sel- 
fish and  interested  motives,  because   he  might  have 
left  it  with  advantage,  and  he  remained  in  it  with  a 
fixed   purpose    of  accepting  no  preferment ;  and  he 
refused  very  considerable  offers  of  this  kind."   In  his 
very  able   and  admirable  work,  Tlic  Cojijessional,  he 
opposes  the  notion  in  all  its  shapes,  that  the  articles 
could  properly  be  subscribed  without  believing  them 

*  See  .4/1  Account  of  Ike  Bangorian  Conlroversi;,  drawn  up  liy  a  person 
thoroughly  acquiiintecl  with  the  subject,  and  with  the  ciiaractcr  of  Hoadly, 
and  printed  in  the  later  editions  of  Hoadly's  Work? 


LET.  n.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  413 

in  their  literal  acceptation.*  After  having  siibscril> 
ed,  he  remained  in  the  Church,  but  refused  advance- 
ment on  the  condition  of  further  subscription,  and 
declined  the  most  liberal  oflers  out  of  the  Church, 
which  he  might  have  accepted  without  subscribing. 
How  is  this  conduct  to  be  explained  by  your  princi- 
ples of  hypocrisy  and  selfishness?  How  is  it  to  be 
explained  in  any  way,  except  by  supposing  the  man 
to  have  yielded  to  a  rigid  sense  of  duty,  and  to  have 
sacrificed  the  prospects  of  Avordly  gain  and  prefer- 
ment to  his  religious  scruples,  and  peace  of  con- 
science ? 

Such  are  the  men,  whom  you  charge  with  the 
grossest  Immorality,  and  say  in  a  late  work,  if  they 
were  Unitarians,  "  they  have  lived  in  habits  of  the 
most  shameful  dishonesty  and  perjury  ;  a  dishonesty 
and  perjury,  which,  if  known,  could  not  fail  of  ren- 
dering them,  in  the  eyes  of  all  upright  men,  a  dis- 
grace to  any  society  calling  itself  a  church  of  Christ.'" 
I  will  not  trust  myself  to  remark  on  such  language 
as  this,  but  leave  every  reader  to  make  his  own  re- 
flections. 

I  am  not  disposed  to  assume  for  these  men  the 
same  merit  for  independence,  as  I  would  for  Ro- 
bertson, LIndsey,  Disney,  Jebb,  Whiston,t  and  others, 

*  See  Confessional,  second  edit.  p.  202.  Also,  Ridley's  Three  Letters  to  the 
.Author  of  the  Confessional.    Letter  Third. 

t  Soon  after  the  accession  of  the  Hanover  family,  it  was  intimated  to  Whis- 
tonby  Sir  Joseph  Jekyl,  that  it  might  be  agreeable  to  the  ruling  party  to  make 
him  a  bishop,  if  he  were  disposed  to  accept  of  preferment.  Whiston  answer- 
ed immediately  ;  "I  would  not  sign  the  Thirty  Nine  Articles  to  be  made 
archbishop  of  Canterbury."     JVhision's  Memoirs,  VoK  L  p.  168. 


414  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [fart  \. 

who  left  the  Church.  Nor  do  I  think  this  necessary 
to  vindicate  their  characters  from  such  allegations,  as 
you  have  made.  No  one  has  any  reason  to  question 
their  motives.  They  Avere  virtuous  and  pious  men. 
Some  of  them  remained  in  the  Church  against  their 
interest,  and  frankly  declared  to  the  world  in  what 
light  they  regarded  subscription.  From  these  pre- 
mises, which  are  thoi'oughly  established,  I  mamtain 
the  inference  to  be  legitimate  and  conclusive,  that 
they  were  honest  and  sincere.  Robertson  and  Lind- 
sey  continued  several  years  in  the  Church  after  they 
became  Unitarians,  and  this,  as  they  tell  you,  with  a 
clear  conscience,  and  under  a  sense  of  duty.  No  one, 
I  apprehend,  will  have  the  hardihood  to  accuse 
them  of  "  dishonesty  and  perjury,"  or  of  prevaricat- 
ing and  dissembling.  There  is  a  christian  virtue, 
called  charity,  which,  as  practised  by  the  Saviour 
and  the  primitive  christians,  should  teach  us  to  think 
favourably  of  our  brethren. 

Trace  your  principle  farther.  It  operates  with 
just  as  much  rigour  on  other  persons  belonging  to 
the  Church,  as  on  Unitarians.  In  truth,  it  reaches 
to  every  individual,  who  subscribes  the  articles.  Do 
you  believe  any  person  to  have  subscribed,  Avho  gave 
credence  literally  to  every  proposition  in  every  arti- 
cle ?  Does  not  each  one  modify  many  parts,  in  ac- 
cordance with  what  he  conceives  to  be  the  meaning 
of  scripture?  And  among  episcopalians,  are  there 
not  all  shades  and  gradations  of  theological  opinions? 
This  is  not  to  be  denied.  But  do  you  suppose  the 
articles   literally  teach   all   religious   opinions?     Do 


iLET.  11.]  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS.  415 

they  teach  Arminianism  to  some,  and  Calvinism  to 
others?  Did  they  teach  Jeremy  Taylor  to  write 
against  original  sin  and  predestinatiqn,  which  are  two 
of  the  most  conspicuous  doctrines  of  the  articles  ? 
Did  they  teach  the  bishop  of  Lincoln  to  defend  the 
doctrine  of  universal  redemption,  and  Scott,  and  his 
Calvinistic  brethren,  to  restrict  the  possibility  of  sal- 
vation to  the  elect  ?  Did  they  teach  Wallis  and 
South  to  find  only  a  trinity  of  modes  in  the  Deity, 
and  Sherlock  to  discover,  that  the  Divinity  consists 
of  three  beings,  as  distinct  as  three  men  ?  When  all 
these  questions  can  be  answered  in  the  affirmative ; 
that  is,  when  innumerable  contradictions  can  be  re- 
conciled, it  may  then  be  proved,  that  all  others  be- 
sides Unitarians  have  concurred  in  receiving  the  arti- 
cles in  their  literal  sense.  It  may  then  be  proved, 
also,  and  not  before,  that  Unitarians,  belonging  to 
the  Church,  have  been  more  dishonest  than  other 
episcopalians,  and  that  all,  indiscriminately,  who  have 
subscribed  the  articles,  were  guilty  of  "dishonesty 
and  perjury." 

Once  more.  Let  the  principle  be  carried  into 
your  own  church.  When  a  candidate  is  licensed  to 
preach,  he  is  required,  by  the  Form  of  Government 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  to  answer  the  following 
question  in  the  affirmative.  "  Do  you  sincerely  re- 
ceive and  adopt  the  Confession  of  Faith  of  this 
church,  as  containing  the  system  of  doctrine  taught 
in  the  holy  Scriptures  ?"*     This  declaration,  so  far 

*  Form  of  Government  in  the  Presbyterian  Ciiurch.     Chap.  xiii.  Section  5. 


416  SENTIMENTS  AND  MORALS  [part  v. 

as  faith  is  concerned,  amounts  to  precisely  the  same 
thing  as  subscription  in  the  Episcopal  Church.  It 
binds  the  candidate  to  receive  the  Confession  of 
Faith  as  the  rule  of  his  opinions. 

Now  this  formulary  is  in  the  highest  tone  of  Calvi- 
nism. What  shall  we  say,  when  we  find  Presbyte- 
rians, who  have  solemnly  made  this  declaration,  af- 
terwards denying  their  belief  of  several  articles  in 
the  Confession  of  Faith  ?  Is  it  not  a  fact,  that  more 
than  one  fifth  of  the  Presbyterian  General  Aseemblj 
arc  Hopkinsians?  Is  it  not  true,  that  some  of  them, 
I  Will  not  undertake  to  say  how  many,  are  inclining 
to  Arminianism  ?  Is  it  not  true,  that  some,  who  call 
themselves  the  "  stricter  sort,"  say  as  little  as  possi- 
ble of  that  vital  doctrine  of  Calvinism,  denominated, 
in  the  Confession  of  Faith, "  God's  Eternal  Decree  ?" 
How  are  these  things  to  be  reconciled?  Shall  we 
cut  the  matter  short,  and  deplore  such  lamentable 
instances  of  "  dishonesty  and  perjury  ?"  No.  Let 
us  put  on  the  garments  of  humility  and  of  charity  ; 
let  each  one  remove  the  beam  from  his  own  eye, 
and  study  the  imperfection  of  his  own  heart.  Let 
him  first  scrutinize  and  judge  himself.  He  will  then 
be  better  prepared  to  enumerate  the  faults,  repro- 
bate the  motives,  and  disparage  the  character  of  his 
brethren.  Nay,  rather,  it  is  hoped  he  will  be  bet- 
ter prepared  for  aiding  the  progress  of  christian 
truth,  and  for  establishing  the  Redeemer's  kingdom, 
the  kingdom  of  piety  and  goodness,  in  the  hearts  and 
lives  of  men. 

I  have  thus  finished  what  I  proposed  to  say  con- 


>,ET.  It."!  OF  ENGLISH  UNITARIANS,  417 

cerning  the  tenets  and  morals  of  several  distinguished 
Unitarians,  whose  practice  you  have  represented  as 
at  variance  with  their  faith.  If  a  hfe  of  uniform 
integrity,  rectitude,  and  piety  can  have  any  claims  on 
our  respect ;  if  the  moral  and  religious  character  of 
these  men  is  to  be  judged  by  the  common  rules  of 
judging  in  similar  cases ;  if  the  tenour  of  their  writings, 
and  the  voice  of  cotemporaries,  may  be  allowed  to 
speak  in  their  behalf ;  we  shall  look  in  vain  among 
the  orthodox,  or  among  any  class  of  men,  for  brighter 
examples  of  the  pure  influence  of  scriptural  Chris- 
tianity. We  can  do  them  no  greater  injustice,  than 
to  listen  to  the  charge,  which  you  have  ventured  to 
prefer  against  them. 

In  the  preceding  letters,  some  of  the  more  promi- 
nent features  only  of  calvinistic  orthodoxy  have  been 
drawn.  To  these  we  must  be  contented  to  limit  the 
present  discussion.  There  would  be  no  end  to  the  la- 
bour of  exposing  the  irrational  principles,  and  tracing 
out  the  evil  consequences  of  this  system.  Its  foundation 
is  laid  deep  in  the  mysteries  of  perverted  metaphysics, 
and  its  ramifications  carry  its  dismal  influence  to  the 
best  powers  of  the  mind,  and  the  best  affections  of 
the  heart.  To  behold  Calvinism  in  its  true  colours,  it 
Avould  be  necessary  to  pursue  its  force  and  tendency 
as  connected  with  the  elements  of  natural  religion, 
the  purposes  of  the  christian  dispensation,  the  ax- 
ioms of  practical  ethics,  the  circle  of  social  inter- 
course, and,  in  short,  all  that  pertains,  either  in 
thought  or  action,  to  the  duties  of  piety  and  benevo- 
lence.    We  should  then  perceive  a  scheme,  indebted 


418  SENTIMENTS,  &c.  OF  UNITARIANS.  [part  v. 

for  its  existence  to  the  workings  of  a  wayward  ima- 
gination in  the  dark  ages  of  the  world,  and  engrafted 
by  a  most  unnatural  alliance  into  the  sublime  system 
of  reason  and  truth,  which  is  written  by  the  linger 
of  God  in  the  hearts  of  men,  and  made  more  bright 
and  certain  by  the  revelation,  the  death,  and  resur- 
rection of  Jesus  Christ.  We  should  be  lost  in  a 
labyrinth  of  dreams  and  shadows,  contradiction  and 
eiTQ;. 


THE   END. 


ERRATA. 


Page  76,  1.  13,  for  "  nature"  read  "  stature." 

96, 1. 1  and  14,  for  "  Hemming"  read  "  Fleming." 
134, 1.  16,  for  <'  Trinity"  read  "  Triunity." 
161, 1.  4,  for  "liear"read  "bear." 
161,  1.  2  from  bottom,  for  «  Section."  read  "  Lection," 
203, 1.  4  from  bottom,  for  <<  degree"  read  "  decree." 
292, 1.  17,  for  «  of  "read  "or." 


/vsi 


